Congress: The Senate & The House

[phkrause]

☠️ Dead bill walkin'

Illustration: Lindsey Bailey/Axios

Today, John Thune acted on the House bill he warned was "dead on arrival." The Senate majority leader all but dismissed the House's passage of a three-year FISA Section 702 extension, announcing the Senate will instead move forward with a 45-day extension. 🗣️ Why it matters: Thune and Speaker Johnson spoke throughout the day — including an in-person meeting — but they continue to talk past each other. "We told him that we can't move the bill" if it includes a central bank digital currency (CBDC) ban attached, Thune told reporters. After a two-hour rule vote, the House passed a FISA bill tonight, 235–191, which included the ban Thune called a nonstarter. ‼️ What we're watching: The FISA authority expires at the end of tomorrow. That means a Senate vote tomorrow, but Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) says he plans to object to unanimous consent. He wants a three-week extension, not 45 days. If it clears the Senate, the House would then vote on the short-term extension, likely under suspension of the rules, sparing Johnson the difficulty of relying on a party-line vote. 😤 Between the lines: Thune appeared exasperated when told the House was struggling to pass a budget reconciliation package to fund ICE and Border Patrol. "That should be the easy part," he said. Thune declined to engage when asked how the Senate can function if the House struggles to pass key legislation. "I don't answer that," he said. "We do what we can." 🤬 The other side: Rank-and-file House Republicans voiced their own frustration. "I hate the Senate," Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-Colo.) said. "There are like two and a half good senators." — Hans Nichols and Kate Santaliz

[phkrause]

⚡️Dems reel over defanged Voting Rights Act

For Democrats, there's no sugarcoating the Supreme Court's weakening of the Voting Rights Act.

• "The corrupt conservative majority on the Supreme Court appointed by Donald Trump has taken a blowtorch to the Voting Rights Act," House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries said in a statement after today's ruling in a Louisiana case.

Why it matters: The ruling is set to cost Democrats at least a few safe House seats in the Deep South immediately, potentially hampering their efforts to retake the lower chamber in November.

• "It's devastating. It's a devastating blow," said Rep. Yvette Clarke (D-N.Y.), the chair of the Congressional Black Caucus. That sentiment was echoed across the CBC.
• "It's not good," said former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.).
• Rep. Terri Sewell (D-Ala.), who represents a Deep South majority-minority district, said she "absolutely" expects the Republican-controlled state Legislature to try to draw her out of her seat this year.

Between the lines: Speaker Johnson called the Supreme Court decision an "obvious result," but it's not clear how far or fast state Republicans will move to redraw maps across the South.

• "We have, as you know, a primary coming up in about two weeks," Johnson said of his home state of Louisiana.
• "So we'll see if the state Legislature deems it appropriate to go in and draw new maps."

Zoom out: Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer called the Supreme Court ruling a "despicable decision" and unveiled a new Democratic "war room" to counter what he said were GOP efforts to "steal" the midterm election.

• Schumer announced an expanded task force on election integrity.
• Dems will "red team" various scenarios with outside groups, including how state-level rules, election administration and the SAVE Act could potentially suppress votes, Schumer said.

The bottom line: "Anyone who tells you they can predict with certainty exactly what comes next is foolish," said Jessica Furst Johnson, a GOP election attorney.

• "However, if states have relied on race to draw maps, they have a problem," she added. "Depending on the state process, they have the ability — if not a mandate — to change it."

— Andrew Solender and Hans Nichols

[phkrause]

🤖 Exclusive: Senators interrogate AI firms on China safeguards

Sens. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) and Jim Banks (R-Ind.) are demanding answers from major tech and artificial intelligence companies over concerns that employees with ties to China could access cutting-edge U.S. AI systems.

🕵🏻‍♂️ Why it matters: Lawmakers are focusing on insider access — not just hacking — as a potential vulnerability, putting pressure on companies to demonstrate stronger safeguards.

• "The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has an extensive track record of conducting espionage on U.S. companies in critical sectors," Grassley and Banks write.

📪 Zoom in: Identical letters sent to the CEOs of Amazon, Anthropic, OpenAI, Google, Meta, Microsoft, Safe Superintelligence Inc., Thinking Machines Lab and xAI ask for responses to nine questions by May 20.

👨‍⚕️ Between the lines: The two senators also indicate they want to work collaboratively with companies to identify and plug potential security gaps.

• They ask: "What support or engagement from Congress or the U.S. government would be useful in securing AI technology, trade secrets, and research from the PRC?"

🔎 Zoom out: Congress has ramped up oversight, including classified briefings with leading AI firms, as Axios reported yesterday.

• U.S. officials have warned that China is conducting "industrial-scale" efforts to extract American AI capabilities, underscoring bipartisan concerns about espionage and technological competition.
• Lawmakers have engaged directly with companies like OpenAI, Anthropic and Nvidia on how their technologies could be secured against foreign access.

Go deeper: See a few of the senator's questions

— Hans Nichols

[Hanseng]

45 minutes ago, phkrause said:

employees with ties to China could access cutting-edge U.S. AI systems.

Laughable that they are concerned about this now. Not long ago, a top  Chinese American AI professor at UCLA, simply packed his bags, gathered his family and moved to Beijing. Apparently he is not the only  one:

 Top AI Researchers Are Heading Back to China as U.S. Struggles to Keep Pace - Beijing Post

Who needs spying and espionage when key figures can simply "go back home"? No risk, no subterfuge, just learn everything you can in America and then move back to your home country, taking everything you know with you. No cloak and dagger stuff, just plain old American stupidity. 

[phkrause]

14 hours ago, Hanseng said:

Laughable that they are concerned about this now. Not long ago, a top  Chinese American AI professor at UCLA, simply packed his bags, gathered his family and moved to Beijing. Apparently he is not the only  one:

Exactly! Also when this administration decided to fire and or get rid of the many of the employees, many of them decided to take there knowledge to other countries!!

[phkrause]

😣 Johnson wins ugly

Speaker Mike Johnson isn't racking up any style points, but wins are wins.

• The Homeland Security shutdown ended with a whimper and a House voice vote.
• FISA got a 45-day extension, this time via unanimous consent.
• And the farm bill hasn't blown up yet, despite an early rebellion by farm-state lawmakers.

🛟 Why it matters: Johnson has shown a willingness to abandon his initial positions and accept outside help.

• 🤬 This time it came at a cost: His relationship with Senate Majority Leader John Thune showed real strain after a month of cross-chamber friction.
• Johnson and Thune had pointed exchanges this week — a notable shift from their previously smooth dynamic.

🛋️ Zoom in: Johnson acted as an amateur therapist for his disgruntled rank-and-file members.

• "I'm doing a lot of therapy sessions tonight," he said last night at a Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America gala.
• "The speaker has a lot of patience," Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas), who had yelled at Johnson about the back and forth on the farm bill, told us.
• "There's just a lot of feelings here," Rep. Nick Langworthy (R-N.Y.) told us of his colleagues. "Everyone wants it to be their idea and their way."

🪏 The big picture: Johnson has built a track record in this zero-margin era of getting his way out of positions that look unfixable.

• Ukraine (April 2024): Relied on Democrats to help advance a $95 billion foreign aid package over GOP opposition. Defeated a motion to vacate his speakership that followed.
• Spending (December 2024): Cut a bipartisan deal to avoid a shutdown after Trump's reelection. Won January's speaker election with ease despite threats to his gavel.
• "One big, beautiful bill"/crypto (July 2025): Broke the record for longest vote (7-plus hours) while negotiating with the House Freedom Caucus. Broke it again two weeks later during a GENIUS Act floor fight, while trying to sway GOP holdouts.

🤗 The bottom line: They aren't clean wins. But he's still here.

— Justin Green, Kate Santaliz and Hans Nichols

[phkrause]

⌛️ Pentagon calls timeout on War Powers

Senate Republicans are calling on the Trump administration to clarify how it is interpreting the 60-day clock under the War Powers Act in its military campaign against Iran.

⏰ Why it matters: The 60-day deadline, depending on who's counting, appears to have arrived on requiring the president to seek congressional authorization or wind down operations. The first strikes against Iran were on Feb. 28.

• But Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth offered a different view during testimony before the Senate Armed Services Committee, suggesting the clock can "pause or stop" during a ceasefire.

👂 Zoom in: Republicans, including some who have flirted with supporting a war powers resolution, appeared open to Hegseth's interpretation.

• "It sounds like there's some wiggle room he provided there for himself," Sen. Todd Young (R-Ind.) told reporters. "We'll take a look at whatever they send over."
• "Presumably, they will communicate that in a formal way," Young added. "They have, in a very careful way, followed the War Powers Act so far."
• "I imagine the administration will send us some sort of formal notification saying, 'Here's where we think we are under the War Powers,'" Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) said. "Either we want 30 more days, or we don't think we need additional time because of X, Y, Z."

👎 The other side: Democrats sharply rejected Hegseth's argument.

• "A ceasefire means bombs aren't dropping," Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) said. "It doesn't mean there are no hostilities. If we're using the U.S. military to blockade everything going into and out of Iran, that's still hostility."
• "That answer showed they know they've got a 60-day problem, and they're trying to come up with a rationale to get around it."

⚡️ The intrigue: The Iran 60-day debate has echoes of a clash between Congress and the White House during the Libya conflict in 2011.

• As the 60-day deadline approached, then-President Obama argued that U.S. involvement — providing intelligence and refueling allied aircraft — did not rise to the level of "hostilities" under the War Powers Act.
• Republicans howled.
• "We're part of an effort to drop bombs on [Moammar Gadhafi's] compounds," then-Speaker John Boehner told the New York Times. "It just doesn't pass the straight-face test, in my view, that we're not in the midst of hostilities."

😎 The bottom line: Sen. Roger Wicker (R-Miss.), the committee chair, said he has "not been too concerned" about the 60-day deadline.

— Hans Nichols

[phkrause]

🇺🇸🇨🇳 Bernie breaks again on AI

Photo illustration: Sarah Grillo/Axios. Photo: Drew Angerer/Getty Images

Intel from Axios AI + Government author Maria Curi on how progressive thinking on the AI arms race might play out: Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) is calling on Washington to collaborate with China on AI, breaking from a bipartisan approach that frames AI development as a race between the two countries. Why it matters: Sanders, who is writing the progressive playbook on AI, is shifting the focus away from U.S.-China competition and toward international cooperation around AI safety. This week, Sanders brought together researchers from the U.S. and China to discuss the "existential threat" of AI and how the two countries could work together. "In the last five months, I've seen the emergence of what I like to joke with my wife as the Bernie to Bannon coalition," said MIT professor Max Tegmark, referring to MAGA influencer Steve Bannon. "Extremely unlikely bedfellows from across the whole political spectrum saying: 'This is crazy. This is absolutely nuts. Let's do something about it.'"

[phkrause]

Speaker Mike Johnson once longed for a ‘normal Congress,’ but that seems long gone in the House

There have been all-night sessions. Hours of dead zones with no action on the floor. Legislation being written on the fly, behind closed doors. Sudden votes scheduled. Spectacular failures. And, as happened this week, stunning turnarounds in which the House actually passes bills. Read more.

RELATED COVERAGE ➤

King Charles III wins praise for deft handling of Trump on his US state visit  Long DACA renewal wait times leave some ‘Dreamers’ without status, a job and fearing detainment  Bessent wants Americans to avoid easy-money traps and invest in financial literacy

[phkrause]

📍Dems' 2028 plans

Illustration: Brendan Lynch/Axios

🌽 A fresh crop of blue and even purple states could emerge as potential redistricting targets ahead of 2028, according to more than 20 federal and state Democratic lawmakers we spoke to. Why it matters: This week's Supreme Court ruling weakening the Voting Rights Act has tamped down some of the Democratic resistance that kept many states from pursuing extreme gerrymanders this election cycle. 🍎 House Democratic caucus chair Pete Aguilar tells us that his home state of California may take another bite of the apple after drawing a new map for 2026. 💪 "We're not going to back away from a fight," he said, adding, "We'll see what Southern states do leading into 2028, when California will respond just like we responded to Texas." Washington and Oregon are two other possibilities, Aguilar told us. Both states would be tough lifts, he said, but the VRA ruling has meaningfully changed Democrats' calculus. State of play: House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, in an interview with Politico, named New York, Illinois, Colorado and Maryland as possible targets. 🚨 A House Democrat from New York told us Jeffries is "dead serious" about pushing redistricting in his home state and predicted Democrats would "likely win" a public redistricting referendum. Even some legislators who previously resisted redistricting in their states appear to be warming up to the idea after Wednesday's decision. Illinois state Rep. La Shawn Ford was one of several Black Caucus members who pushed back against Gov. JB Pritzker's attempt to redistrict last fall. He told us that "all things should be considered at this point." "We can't just sit back and watch Republicans and the courts erode voter rights protection and do nothing," Ford, the Democratic nominee in the state's safely blue U.S. House 7th District, said in a phone interview yesterday. 📢 What they're saying: Democrats need to "keep everything on the table," said Rep. Rob Menendez Jr. (D-N.J.), "and if that's the game we're going to play across the country, then I think we need to be prepared to engage." "At a minimum," Menendez said, lawmakers should "think about what that would look like, make sure that we're ready from a process perspective and have a vision of what it could be." 🤔 The intrigue: House Democrats told us they are going to simultaneously push legislation to eliminate gerrymandering nationwide. "Things are changing dramatically, and the public hates partisan gerrymandering, so I think we've got to give it a try," said Maryland Rep. Jamie Raskin, the top Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee. Raskin, who said he would be "centrally" involved in that effort, thinks some Republicans "could be persuaded" to get on board. Go deeper: A state-by-state rundown of Democrats' possible targets — Andrew Solender and Justin Kaufmann

[phkrause]

👉 Not buyin' it on Iran

Congressional Democrats aren't buying President Trump's declaration that the hostilities the U.S. initiated against Iran on Feb. 28 have been "terminated."

Why it matters: Republicans have not jumped in to defend — or dispute — the formal notification Trump sent to Congress this afternoon.

• 😡 "Trump is trying to do another end-run around Congress, declaring his illegal war 'terminated,' when it's anything but," Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) told us. "This is a farce and no self-respecting Republican should believe it."
• "President Trump declaring the war with Iran 'terminated' doesn't reflect the reality that tens of thousands of U.S. service members in the region are still in harm's way," said Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), the ranking member on the Foreign Relations Committee.

⏰ State of play: By declaring the hostilities over, Trump is effectively resetting the 60-day clock under the War Powers Act.

• "On April 7, 2026, I ordered a two-week ceasefire. The ceasefire has since been extended. There has been no exchange of fire between United States forces and Iran since April 7, 2026," Trump wrote to Speaker Mike Johnson today.
• 💥 "The hostilities that began on February 28, 2026, have terminated."

The bottom line: Expect Democrats in both chambers to challenge Trump's declaration by bringing war powers resolutions to the floor when lawmakers return from recess in the second week of May.

• The Senate yesterday blocked a war powers resolution aimed at forcing Trump to end — or seek authorization for — military action against Iran. Two Republicans — Sens. Susan Collins of Maine and Rand Paul of Kentucky — voted with Democrats.

— Hans Nichols

[phkrause]

War Powers Showdown

Yesterday marked 60 days since President Donald Trump notified Congress of military action in Iran—a deadline many lawmakers and legal experts say requires him to either end the operation or secure explicit congressional approval. The War Powers Resolution—which says Congress must approve hostilities that continue beyond 60 days—was enacted in the aftermath of the Vietnam War to reaffirm the legislative branch's exclusive constitutional power to declare war (watch 101). While Trump could seek one 30-day extension to withdraw forces, he has not done so. Instead, his administration argues the ongoing ceasefire pauses or stops the 60-day clock. Republicans have largely deferred to Trump; Congress went into recess Thursday after Senate Republicans rejected a Democrat-led effort to force the withdrawal of US forces from Iran for the sixth time. Presidents have largely sidestepped the War Powers Act since its passage over five decades ago, including Bill Clinton during a 78-day bombing campaign in Kosovo and Barack Obama during a 222-day UN and NATO operation in Libya.

[phkrause]

Dem foreign policy reboot for '28

Illustration: Gabriella Turrisi / Axios

🌎 Senior Democrats are rebooting an influential foreign policy group to help potential 2028 presidential candidates and bring together national security specialists who could staff the next Democratic administration, Axios has learned. National Security Action has picked Maher Bitar, who has worked for Democrats on Capitol Hill and in the White House, to lead the group going into the 2028 primary season. 🏛️ Why it matters: Founded in 2018, National Security Action (NSA) influenced Democrats' messaging on foreign policy in the 2020 election and ultimately helped staff much of President Biden's national security team. That included then-National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan, who co-founded NSA. The group aims to have a similar influence in the 2028 election and the next Democratic administration. Ben Rhodes, who founded the group with Sullivan and is on its board, said the group's "two most interesting projects to think about are the pipeline of people who might work on campaigns and populate a Democratic administration, and then the ideas that can form a progressive or Democratic foreign policy going forward." "I think the next Democratic administration should look quite different [from the Biden administration]," he added. "It's kind of time to pass the baton so there's a really great opportunity to try to talent spot, and help elevate some different voices." The big picture: NSA's challenge will be navigating the divides on foreign policy in the Democratic Party that are much deeper than they were during President Trump's first term. 🇮🇱 80% of Democrats now view Israel unfavorably, up from 53% in 2022, before Hamas' Oct. 7 attack on Israel and the subsequent war in Gaza, per Pew. The party is also unsettled on issues like tariffs, China and artificial intelligence. That skepticism has split the party and made some on the left wary of people who served in the Biden administration. As Axios CEO Jim VandeHei noted in his C-Suite newsletter yesterday, 40 of 47 Senate Democrats voted last month to block arms sales to Israel. Among them: every Democratic senator viewed as seriously weighing a White House bid — Arizona's Mark Kelly and Ruben Gallego, New Jersey's Cory Booker, Michigan's Elissa Slotkin, Georgia's Jon Ossoff and Connecticut's Chris Murphy. What they're saying: "The center of gravity has shifted on the relationship with Israel, and there will be a debate about the nature of the relationship going forward," said Sullivan, who rejoined NSA's board after leaving the Biden administration. Read more. — Alex Thompson

[phkrause]

💛 Senate's gilded vote

Chuck Schumer's Senate Democrats are salivating at the chance to force every Republican to vote on $1 billion for security upgrades tied to President Trump's new White House ballroom.

Why it matters: A billion-dollar, Trump-branded gilded ballroom — which the president insisted would be privately funded — is the kind of affordability contrast Democrats have dreamed about for the 2026 midterms.

• "It's an outrageous betrayal of hardworking families who want lower costs, not a golden ballroom," said Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.), the top Democrat on the Senate Appropriations Committee.
• "Republicans are ignoring middle-class needs and funneling money into Trump's ballroom while throwing billions at two lawless agencies," said Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), the top Democrat on the Budget Committee.

Driving the news: Republicans tucked $1 billion for the Secret Service to fund "above-ground and below-ground security features" in the East Wing into their $72 billion reconciliation bill, part of a broader package aimed at funding ICE and Border Patrol through fiscal 2029.

• The provision explicitly bars spending on "non-security elements."
• Trump had insisted that "no government funds" would be used in the ballroom's construction.

Zoom in: Expect the ballroom to take center stage in the Senate "vote-a-rama" that the reconciliation bill must survive before it can reach the president's desk.

• One catch: Democrats privately worry the Senate parliamentarian could strip the $1 billion provision before it ever hits the floor.

Zoom out: After the shooting at the White House Correspondents' Dinner last month, some Republicans pushed for Congress to cover what was then a roughly $400 million ballroom price tag.

• Senate Budget Committee chair Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) said he'd rather handle it through the normal appropriations process — and made clear he's open to forcing Democrats to go on the record on funding a secure venue for large-scale presidential events.

— Hans Nichols

ps:How many times have they done this? And each time it seems to backfire on them!!!!!

[phkrause]

😤 House Dems rage

Over in the House, the $1 billion for Trump's ballroom project sent Democrats into a frenzy today. Why it matters: To many lawmakers, it's a grim display of how far Republicans have gone in subordinating Congress' prerogatives to the executive branch. "Their political castration is complete," Rep. Jared Huffman (D-Calif.) told us. "They're sending Trump $1 billion to build a gilded room for their balls." "It's time for them to find the spine that holds them upward," Rep. Mark Pocan (D-Wis.) told us about Republicans. Between the lines: "If we had a different [president], we wouldn't need the security measures that they're proposing," fumed Rep. Steve Cohen (D-Tenn.). "In fact, if he just stayed in the White House, we wouldn't need the security measures." The bottom line: The Republican-controlled House only needs a simple majority to pass the reconciliation bill — though their tight vote margins could be an issue. A senior House Democrat told us their party "will do everything to fight it and tie [it] around Republicans when they vote." — Andrew Solender

[phkrause]

⚡️ Lutnick's Hill backup

House Oversight Chair James Comer (R-Ky.) provided some critical backup for Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick today after closed-door testimony on his ties to the late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.

Why it matters: Democrats came out hot after the testimony.

• "If Donald Trump had seen the video transcript, he would have fired Howard Lutnick," said Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.).

But Comer said Lutnick was "very forthcoming" although he hadn't been "100% truthful" in past comments.

• "We're going to ask him all these questions, and we'll let the American people judge whether the credibility was damaged or not," Comer said.
• Lutnick answered some 400 questions during the interview, a spokesperson told Fox News.

The bottom line: "I feel very comfortable saying that Howard Lutnick is a pathological liar," said Rep. Yassamin Ansari (D-Ariz.) to reporters during a break in Lutnick's testimony.

🏃 For Comer, the day started with an easier win.

• He finished first among members in the annual ACLI Capital Challenge, a 5K race in Anacostia Park.
• His 32:29 time was a bit slower than the 20:34 Rep. Greg Casar (D-Texas) posted last year, when Congress was in session on race day.

— Justin Green

[phkrause]

‼️ Schumer's multifront war

Chuck Schumer's headaches may only just be getting started after the Senate minority leader's handpicked candidate to take down Sen. Susan Collins was forced to drop out early in Maine's Democratic primary.

Why it matters: Progressive candidates are mounting serious, well-funded campaigns against more traditional Democrats in Senate primaries across the country.

• 🧳 Moderate Democrats are worried that progressive candidates, especially those with baggage, will hurt their chances of flipping key Senate seats if nominated.
• 🍪 Progressives argue that party leaders are relying on an outdated, cookie-cutter formula to determine who is "electable."
• 🦪 After oyster farmer Graham Platner became the Democrats' presumptive Senate nominee in Maine over Gov. Janet Mills, Senate leaders have more anti-establishment fights ahead.

Zoom in: Here's a guide to the biggest upcoming Democratic Senate primaries that exemplify the party's civil war:

1. ⛴️ Michigan: Rep. Haley Stevens is the establishment favorite and is seen by the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee as the strongest candidate in the fall. Polls show she's locked in a tight race with the Bernie Sanders-backed former public health official Abdul El-Sayed and the digitally savvy liberal state Sen. Mallory McMorrow.
2. 🏕️ Minnesota: Rep. Angie Craig, a battle-tested swing-seat Democrat, is viewed by liberals as the party leaders' preferred candidate. Peggy Flanagan, the progressive lieutenant governor who has attacked Craig as too squishy on ICE, has led in polling.
3. 🐷 Iowa: Schumer and his allies believe Josh Turek, a state lawmaker and Paralympic gold medalist, has the best chance in the general election. Recent polling conducted by a group supporting Turek shows him ahead by a comfortable margin. But Turek's progressive opponent, Zach Wahls, matched him in first-quarter fundraising, and past polls have shown him as more competitive.

The other side: Even though Schumer whiffed in Maine and faces messy primaries in the near future, he also successfully recruited top Democratic candidates in Ohio, Alaska and North Carolina.

• Former Sen. Sherrod Brown, former Rep. Mary Peltola and former Gov. Roy Cooper, respectively, are widely seen in the party as star recruits.
• Schumer and Platner have spoken over the phone since Mills exited the race. Also, the DSCC has not endorsed any candidates in Michigan, Minnesota or Iowa.

The bottom line: "If you spend any time on the ground in Iowa, in Michigan, in Minnesota ... you will be absolutely floored with the intensity and the anger of Democratic primary voters," Bill Neidhardt, a Democratic strategist working to elect some of the anti-establishment Senate contenders, told us.

• Their fury is "not comprehended in the least by a lot of folks in D.C.," he said.
• "Our focus is on winning a Democratic Senate majority in November," said DSCC spokesperson Maeve Coyle. "We created a path to do that this cycle by recruiting formidable candidates, expanding the map and disqualifying Republican opponents — and we are confident those strategies will lead us to victory."

— Holly Otterbein

[phkrause]

Upended by Trump

President Trump's declaration that hostilities with Iran are "terminated" has thrown Democrats' strategy around congressional war powers into turmoil.

🗳️ Why it matters: House Democrats had been planning to force a war powers vote every day. It is now unclear whether that will — or even can — happen.

• Lawmakers have been quietly reassessing how to approach the matter when Congress returns next week, according to multiple aides and lawmakers familiar with the matter.

🔚 Driving the news: Trump sent Congress a notification last week that the hostilities the U.S. initiated against Iran on Feb. 28 "have terminated."

• Trump cited the April 7 ceasefire he brokered with Iran, writing that there has "been no exchange of fire between United States forces and Iran since" then.
• Democrats roundly rejected that framing of the situation, pointing to the U.S. military's blockade of Iranian vessels in the Gulf of Oman.
• "With an active blockade and shooting, plus threats of resuming bombing at any moment, I don't know anyone who takes that argument seriously," Rep. Jared Huffman (D-Calif.) told us.

The latest: The U.S. launched airstrikes on Iran's Qeshm port and the coastal city of Bandar Abbas today, but it does not see the operation as restarting the war or breaking the ceasefire, an American official told Axios' Barak Ravid.

😈 Between the lines: The congressional notification was Trump's way of bypassing a War Powers Act requirement that he seek approval for continued operations in Iran within 60 days of the conflict's inception.

• But some Democratic lawmakers fear it may also be used by Republicans as a pretext to shut down their efforts to force votes on war powers resolutions.
• A spokesperson for Speaker Johnson did not respond to a request for comment on the matter.

What to watch: Spokespeople for several of the House Democrats who introduced war powers resolutions in recent weeks did not respond to questions about whether their bosses still plan to try to force those votes or declined to give a definitive answer.

• "We'll see if there's any reconsideration of strategy when we get back," Huffman told us.
• A spokesperson for Rep. Jason Crow (D-Colo.) noted that he and Rep. Seth Moulton (D-Mass.) introduced a war powers resolution even after Trump's declaration — potentially signaling plans to forge ahead.

— Andrew Solender

[phkrause]

😱 Dems' disaster scenario

Hakeem Jeffries' bid to win a House majority in November was dealt what Democrats are acknowledging was a major setback this morning:

• The Virginia Supreme Court struck down a congressional map that would have netted them as many as four seats

Why it matters: The decision is a huge boost to Republicans' chances of keeping the House: Even some Democrats now concede that they basically need to run the table in November.

• 🚨 Jeffries (D-N.Y.) said in a statement, "We are exploring all options to overturn this shocking decision. No matter what it takes."
• "Damn, California and Virginia were supposed to be our bigger ones," one House Democrat, speaking on the condition of anonymity to avoid getting out ahead of their leadership, said in a phone interview just after the ruling was released.
• 🌊 "This means we gotta make sure we have a good wave to win the House ... we have to make sure we win a lot of those toss-ups," the lawmaker said. "Democrats now have to pitch a perfect game."

Another House Democrat, also speaking on the condition of anonymity, offered a one-word reaction in a text message to Axios: "F*****ck!!"

• Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee chair Suzan DelBene (D-Wash.) said in a statement: "This is a setback that sends a terrible message to Americans — the powerful and elite will do everything they can to silence you."

🚗 Driving the news: The Virginia Supreme Court overturned the results of an April referendum that temporarily suspended the state's independent redistricting commission.

• Democrats had been aiming to implement maps that would turn their party's current 6-5 edge in the state's U.S. House delegation into a 10-1 advantage as a way to counter GOP redistricting in Texas and elsewhere.

"Democrats cannot take a midterm victory for granted," said a third House Democrat, adding that "relying too much on the administration's unpopularity and not enough of their own positive agenda could put an otherwise sure victory at risk."

• 🤢 Rep. Marc Veasey (D-Texas) called the ruling "sickening" and said it is "clearly a disappointment."

💰 The intrigue: The ruling even has some lawmakers questioning the wisdom of Democrats spending $62.5 million to push the Virginia redistricting referendum — including nearly $40 million from Jeffries-aligned 501(c)4 House Majority Forward.

• "I feel like this is a colossal waste of resources that will further erode our politics," a fourth House Democrat told Axios, referring to the entire nationwide redistricting battle.
• "How many millions of dollars are we spending on this when the DNC is in debt and we have 40 frontline races to win?"

Yes, but: Many Democrats are still optimistic their party can win a big enough wave in November to overcome what is now a daunting structural disadvantage.

• "Trump will still have to deal with a Democratic majority in the House come November," Veasey said.
• Said Rep. Brad Sherman (D-Calif.): "In spite of all the redistricting machinations, I think we will take back the House."

The bottom line: This may still be a lose-lose for Jeffries, with even lawmakers who are optimistic about retaking the House acknowledging he will likely have — at best — an agonizingly narrow majority.

• "Everybody will exert their pressure," the first House Democrat said.
• Just ask House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) how much fun that has been for him.

— Andrew Solender

[phkrause]

🥊 Johnson's three battles

👀 The speaker is staring down three messy fights when the House returns Tuesday.

Why it matters: Johnson may have survived "hell week" and ended the politically painful DHS shutdown just before Congress left town, but he'll return to Washington with a long to-do list.

💃 Senate Republicans' decision to include $1 billion in funding for security measures for President Trump's ballroom as part of the GOP's reconciliation package to fund ICE and CBP is already hitting some roadblocks with House Republicans.

• 🏗️ Trump had pledged that "no government funds" would be used in the ballroom's construction.
• But now Democrats are eager to highlight the affordability contrast and get their Republican colleagues on record supporting the funding.

😡 And Trump's insistence that the 60-day deadline does not apply to his Iran operation is fueling bipartisan frustration on Capitol Hill.

• Rep. Tom Barrett (R-Mich.) introduced an AUMF on Thursday that would require Trump to end U.S. military involvement in Iran by July 30, the latest sign of growing Republican unease with the conflict.
• House Democrats could continue forcing votes on war powers resolutions, putting vulnerable Republicans in politically tricky positions.

💬 Conversations around sexual harassment and misconduct on Capitol Hill also threaten to boil over when lawmakers return.

• Look for Reps. Anna Paulina Luna (R-Fla.), Nancy Mace (R-S.C.) and Lauren Boebert (R-Colo.) to keep pressuring Johnson to change how Congress handles misconduct allegations and staff protections.
• 💥 The renewed push comes after Axios reported allegations that Rep. Chuck Edwards (R-N.C.) had inappropriate relationships with two young female staffers.
• One House Republican told Axios they believe Edwards "should go."

Bonus: Congressional leaders also have a short runway before another FISA expiration deadline.

• 🏈 Lawmakers have already punted the issue twice and remain far from an agreement on a long-term extension of Section 702, the government's warrantless surveillance authority.

— Kate Santaliz

[phkrause]

🏛️ Congress' biggest reckoning since #MeToo

Illustration: Sarah Grillo/Axios. Stock: Getty Images

Congress is going through its biggest reckoning over sexual misconduct since the #MeToo movement rocked Capitol Hill nearly a decade ago, Axios' Kate Santaliz reports. "I think it's gonna take women burning down the house," a House Republican told Axios. Why it matters: Nearly a decade after lawmakers instituted reforms around sexual harassment, new allegations are exposing what members and staffers say remains an open secret — a culture of bad behavior on the Hill. "It's complete bullsh*t," a House Republican told Axios. "Like you have all these guys sleeping with their employees, and nothing happens, and everybody knows what's going on." The renewed scrutiny intensified after two lawmakers — Reps. Tony Gonzales (R-Texas) and Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.) — resigned last month amid allegations of sexual misconduct. Swalwell also faces allegations of sexual assault. Swalwell denies the allegations. Gonzales admitted to an affair with a staffer who later died by suicide. 🗞️ Separately, Axios reported this week that Rep. Chuck Edwards (R-N.C.) had singled out two young female staffers for special attention that sources described as inappropriate. Edwards called the allegations "horsesh*t" in an interview with The Assembly, a North Carolina-based publication, though he didn't address the specifics. 🐘 Between the lines: The loudest demands for accountability are coming from Republican women, who are increasingly willing to publicly torch colleagues they believe leadership has protected for too long. Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (R-Fla.), Rep. Nancy Mace (R-S.C.) and Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-Colo.) have emerged as aggressive voices pushing to expose misconduct allegations and force consequences. 👀 Behind the scenes: Frustration is growing with the House Ethics Committee, which members in both parties complain moves too slowly.

[phkrause]

🚔 GOP's security referendum

Senate Republican leaders plan to turn the political fight over the $1 billion request for security upgrades tied to the new White House ballroom into a referendum on President Trump's safety.

Why it matters: Democrats think the $1 billion figure gives them a simple, bumper-sticker attack against Republicans for voters who are concerned about the cost of living.

• But Senate Majority Leader John Thune said the funding is intended to secure the new facility and ensure the Secret Service has the resources needed to protect the president.
• "It's a security-related measure," Thune told reporters today. "You've got a president where there have been three assassination attempts in just the last two years."

Between the lines: House Speaker Mike Johnson will seek to heal growing friction with his Senate counterparts in remarks at tomorrow's Senate GOP lunch, we reported today.

• Johnson is expected to stress open lines of communication as Republicans gear up for reconciliation packages 2.0 and 3.0. It will mark Johnson's first appearance at a Senate GOP lunch this year.
• U.S. Secret Service director Sean Curran will also join the lunch as the Senate considers funding for presidential security and the need for security enhancements in the new ballroom, two sources told us.

Zoom in: Thune's comments seem as directed at GOP holdouts as they are at Democrats.

• Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) told reporters: "I'm looking forward to seeing the details this week."
• Senate Appropriations Chair Susan Collins (R-Maine) told reporters: "It was my understanding it was supposed to be paid for by private donations. That's what the president has said."
• "I have a feeling it may either not be in the bill or it may not pass the Byrd test, but we'll know probably more next week," said Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), who prefers to use private donations for the ballroom.

The bottom line: "They've become ballroom Republicans," said Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer.

— Hans Nichols and Kate Santaliz

[phkrause]

The invisible leaders

Illustration: Maura Kearns / Axios

Billions will be spent to deliver a majority for Speaker Johnson or House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries this fall, but very little will cast them as main characters — either as heroes or villains. 🤬 Why it matters: Neither House leader inspires the partisan animosity — a la former Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) — that makes them ideal for attack ads, according to party strategists working on House races. Expect to see much more of President Trump, New York Mayor Zohran Mamdani and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.), strategists tell us. 🚗 Driving the news: An Axios review of ads on the tracking site AdImpact turned up just a handful of Republican ads run since January 2025 that reference Jeffries. 📺 Derek Merrin, a GOP candidate in Ohio's 9th District, is running an ad that juxtaposes Rep. Marcy Kaptur (D-Ohio) with Jeffries and Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), with a voice-over saying the district "doesn't need another politician." The NRCC has been running an ad specifically targeting Jeffries, accusing him of plotting a "Project 2026" to "remake America" with left-wing policies. We couldn't find any Democratic ads this election cycle that make explicit reference to Johnson. The other side: Rep. Jen Kiggans (R-Va.) is facing Democratic calls to resign after she said, "Yes, yes to that" after a radio host said Jeffries should get his "cotton-picking hands off of Virginia." Kiggans, who later denied the suggestion that she agreed with the comment and said she does not condone it, is locked in one of the most competitive House races in the country. Between the lines: There is a storied history of political ad-makers trying to take down swing-district candidates by tying them to their party's congressional leaders. ⚡️ Pelosi was the prime example: She was an uber-popular Republican target as far back as 2006, before her first stint as speaker. But Jeffries and Johnson are newish to their roles and have cultivated reputations as inoffensive behind-the-scenes operators relative to the firebrands in their respective parties. 🔨 A Democratic strategist also pointed to the fact that the party has explicitly hammered a message that casts Johnson as the "deputy speaker" playing second fiddle to Trump. 🌎 Zoom out: Trump is nearly ubiquitous in Democratic ads, including those used against other Democrats in contested primaries. House Majority Forward, the nonprofit arm of House Democrats' main super PAC, makes repeated references to Trump in ads blasting vulnerable GOP incumbents on tariffs, Medicaid cuts and rising prices. Republicans have plenty of Democratic targets in their ads, including Ocasio-Cortez, Mamdani, Sanders, former Vice President Kamala Harris, Pelosi and California Gov. Gavin Newsom. — Andrew Solender

[phkrause]

😓 Sweating the ballroom

The billion-dollar request for the Secret Service isn't dead. But it is in doubt.

• Senate Majority Leader John Thune and the White House face a long week to learn if 50 Republicans — and the Senate parliamentarian — will sign off on the new funding as part of the $72 billion ICE and Border Patrol reconciliation package.

😩 Why it matters: Senate Republicans are struggling to get comfortable with the proposed $220 million request to "harden" security at the White House complex — including President Trump's new East Wing ballroom.

• They were unmoved by a line-item lobbying effort from Secret Service director Sean Curran in a closed-door lunch today, as we scooped earlier.
• "One of the biggest concerns on our side is adding to the deficit," Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.) told reporters. Kennedy is preparing an amendment to trim the broader $72 billion ICE and Border Patrol package by $1 billion to offset the security funding.
• "It's not my favorite thing," Sen. Roger Wicker (R-Miss.) told HuffPost.

🚔 Zoom in: Curran broke the proposed $1 billion request into six categories, including $180 million for a new White House visitor screening facility and $100 million for security at "high-profile national events."

• Thune sought to downplay the ballroom component, arguing that security tied to the East Wing expansion "represents about 20% of what this request was."
• "The ballroom is being financed privately," he said.

🛑 The other side: Sen. Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.) plans to offer amendments during next week's vote-a-rama to strip funding for the East Wing security upgrades.

• "I call on my Republican colleagues to redirect this funding toward supporting our law enforcement and investing in public safety instead of Trump's ballroom," Rosen said in a statement.
• "Americans don't want a ballroom blitz," Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said. "They want Congress to bring the cost down."

— Hans Nichols

[phkrause]

😰 Dems pressure Kiggans

Rep. Jen Kiggans (R-Va.) faces a growing call from Democrats to resign over what they say is her agreement with a radio host's derogatory comments about House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries.

Why it matters: The firestorm comes as Kiggans, who has denied any wrongdoing, is running for reelection in one of the most hotly contested battleground districts in the country.

• More than a dozen House Democrats — including Jeffries' top two lieutenants — had called for Kiggans to resign as of this afternoon, with others vowing to unseat her in November either way.
• Kiggans said in a post on X: "The radio host should not have used that language and I do not -and did not - condone it. It was obvious to anyone listening that I was agreeing Hakeem Jefferies [sic] should stay out of Virginia."

‼️ House Speaker Mike Johnson told reporters: "Sometimes people misspeak. ... I'll talk to her about it, but you should not be evaluating the character of Jen Kiggans based on some comment that supposedly she said."

• The controversy centers on an interview Kiggans gave to Richmond-based radio host Brandon Herrera on Democrats' thwarted effort to redistrict Virginia's congressional map in their favor.
• Said Herrera: "If Hakeem Jeffries wants to be involved in Virginia politics, then I suggest he ... leave New York, move down here to Virginia, run for office down here, you can represent us. If not, get your cotton-picking hands off of Virginia."
• "That's right. Ditto. Yes. Yes, to that," Kiggans replied.

State of play: Jeffries' No. 2 and No. 3 in Democratic leadership, Minority Whip Katherine Clark (D-Mass.) and House Democratic caucus chair Pete Aguilar (D-Calif.), called for Kiggans to step down last night.

• They were joined by the Congressional Black Caucus and Rep. Gregory Meeks (D-N.Y.), the chair of the Black Caucus PAC, who told us he agreed with Clark that Kiggans should step down.
• Jeffries spokesperson Christie Stephenson did not go as far as to call on Kiggans to resign, saying in a statement, "Jen Kiggans ... apparently craves a return to the days of Jim Crow racial oppression in the South."

The other side: Kiggans said in her post on X, "This is precisely what's wrong with Democrats. Every lie and distortion is intended to distract from getting their hats handed to them and the Virginia Supreme Court's clear message: stop trying to rig our elections."

• Said NRCC spokesperson Will Kiley: "Democrats' performative outrage over this total nothing-burger is completely selective and driven by politics, not principle."

— Andrew Solender