Congress: The Senate & The House

[phkrause]

🧊 Reforms on ice

House Speaker Mike Johnson's decision to cancel two weeks of September workdays is threatening to delay a bipartisan push to crack down on sexual misconduct in Congress, the lead Democrat on the bipartisan task force tells us.

Why it matters: The House task force created to address sexual misconduct had hoped to unveil legislation this month after having already pushed back its initial goal of releasing a bill before the August recess.

• But Johnson's new schedule means the House will be in session for just one more week before lawmakers leave Washington to campaign ahead of the November midterms.
• 🗓️ The shortened calendar gives members eager to hit the campaign trail more time in their districts but leaves lawmakers with little time to finish remaining legislative business.

The reforms are "something that everybody wants," Rep. Teresa Leger Fernández (D-N.M.), the lead Democrat on the task force, told us.

• "We have bipartisan support for it. But when you cancel legislative days, it shrinks our ability to get that work done," she added.
• The week of Sept. 14 is now scheduled to be the only one in session until after the midterms.
• Yes, but: Being out of session does not preclude the task force from releasing their recommendations or legislation, a senior Republican staffer told Axios.
• Lawmakers often introduce legislation when Congress is out of session.

📝 Catch up quick: The bipartisan task force, created this year amid a string of allegations involving members of Congress, is examining potential changes to the chamber's rules surrounding sexual misconduct.

• Leger Fernández said the task force heard from dozens of male and female congressional staffers this week in what she described as the final round of feedback needed before moving to legislative text.
• Kammack told us Tuesday — before Johnson canceled session time — that the group was still on track to release legislative text this month.
• "When we take away two weeks of the September legislative calendar, that puts a little strain on it," Leger Fernández said.

🔎 Zoom in: The task force members are now moving to draft legislative text and will discuss the compressed timeline with Johnson and the Office of Legislative Counsel, Leger Fernández said.

• Potential reforms under discussion include changes to reporting systems, retaliation protections, increases in education and training resources, and a ban on lawmaker-staff relations.
• "There's still strong commitment to get it done," she said. "We'll keep pushing to see how we get it done." 

— Kate Santaliz

[phkrause]

🛑 Bernie floats superintelligence ban

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) announced new legislation yesterday calling for a permanent ban on superintelligence alongside a renewed demand for a pause on advanced AI development, Axios' Josephine Walker reports.

• "If the leaders of the major AI companies acknowledge that they are losing control of their extremely dangerous technology, it is irresponsible for society to allow them to move forward and make these products even more advanced," Sanders said in his announcement.

Why it matters: Sanders is the first prominent American politician to call for an outright ban on superintelligence — and he did so on the day of Astra's release. His announcement also referenced the Hugging Face attack.

Between the lines: Sanders' decision to stake out a position on superintelligence puts him at the forefront of an emerging political debate, in a way that doesn't totally align with the traditional left-right spectrum.

• He's siding with "doomers," who worry that super-advanced AI could bring about a literal apocalypse — a position contemplated by a significant faction within the AI community, including its top leaders.
• Others argue that doomerism is itself another form of hype for the AI industry, and that society should focus on the tech's human-scale impact.
• That same political realignment is already showing up in the politics surrounding data centers, where Sanders and Steve Bannon have found common political cause against them.

The bottom line: Even if Sanders' efforts go nowhere, it shows that he believes there's an audience hungry for much more aggressive policymaking on AI.

[phkrause]

🚨 Another GOP warning sign

Illustration: Brendan Lynch / Axios. Stock: Getty Images

Another warning light is blinking for Senate Republicans: underperforming gubernatorial nominees in three crucial Midwest states. Why it matters: Strong candidates for governor can act as sheepdogs in tight Senate races, keeping Republican voters — and GOP-curious independents — moving in the party's direction. 😉 That's adding to GOP anxiety in Michigan and Iowa, where the Democratic gubernatorial nominees have led for much of the summer. In Ohio — a state President Trump won by 11 points — the governor's race is tied. By the numbers: In Iowa, state Auditor Rob Sand (D) leads state Rep. Zach Lahn (R) 49.3% to 45.3%, according to 270toWin's polling average. In Michigan, Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson (D) leads Rep. John James (R-Mich.) by an average of 50.2% to 42.4% across the last five polls. In Ohio, former Republican presidential candidate Vivek Ramaswamy leads former state health director Amy Acton (D) by just half a point, 48% to 47.5%, in an average of two August polls. The other side: The gubernatorial map isn't flashing warnings everywhere for Senate Republicans. 💪 Republicans are enthusiastic about Georgia, where the race between former Atlanta Mayor Keisha Lance Bottoms (D) and health care executive Rick Jackson (R) is tight, but Jackson is expected to spend heavily in the final months. In Texas, Gov. Greg Abbott (R) leads state Rep. Gina Hinojosa (D) 47.2% to 43.7%, according to 270toWin. And in New Hampshire, Gov. Kelly Ayotte (R) leads former Executive Councilor Cinde Warmington (D) by an average of 49% to 38.5%. 🤔 The intrigue: In Ohio, Michigan and New Hampshire, the governor's race is at the top of the ticket, potentially creating a stronger draft for the Senate candidates behind them. In Iowa, Texas and Georgia, it's the Senate contest that gets top billing, potentially limiting the gubernatorial candidates' coattails. 🌎 Zoom out: In previous midterm cycles, strong GOP gubernatorial candidates have run well ahead of their Senate counterparts. 🤠 In Texas in 2018, Abbott won by 13 percentage points while Sen. Ted Cruz (R) squeaked past Beto O'Rourke by fewer than 3. 🌽 In 2022, Iowa Gov. Kim Reynolds (R) won by nearly 19 points as Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) won by 12. 🐊 In Florida that year, Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) cruised to victory by 19 points as Sen. Marco Rubio (R) won by 16. 🔎 Zoom in: Coattails aren't tow ropes, and split decisions between the gubernatorial and Senate contests do happen, though they are more common in non-presidential years. In 2022, six of the 26 states that held both gubernatorial and Senate elections chose winners from different parties. But two years later, with Trump on the ticket, none of the nine states holding both contests split between Democrats and Republicans, although independent Sen. Bernie Sanders won alongside Republican Gov. Phil Scott in Vermont. ⚡️ The bottom line: Republicans don't need to win every governor's mansion to hold the Senate, but losing badly in Michigan, Iowa or Ohio would make three already tight Senate races that much harder. — Hans Nichols

[phkrause]

Progressives' newest weapon

After winning an upset primary victory over a field of better-funded, establishment-backed rivals, Rep. Analilia Mejia (D-N.J.) is launching a super PAC to help other progressive underdogs do the same, we have learned.

Why it matters: Mejia is adding to a growing constellation of new progressive super PACs trying to compete with cash-rich groups like AIPAC that back more moderate Democrats in primaries.

• It's all part of a strategy that has helped the left pull off a series of high-profile primary victories this election cycle over incumbents and establishment favorites.
• "We're ready to build a new class of unbought, unbossed candidates who will refuse corporate PAC money and will stand for the values that the American people are demanding," Mejia said in a statement.

Driving the news: Mejia's group, Unbought, Unbossed PAC, will train and fund "working-class and underrepresented community leaders" running for office, according to a press release first shared with us.

• It will also provide "voter education resources and voter protection training" and build "a nationwide community of candidates, organizers, and local leaders who can learn from one another and organize beyond any single election."
• "Unbought, Unbossed PAC is about finding the next generation of leaders who are already fighting for their communities and giving them the tools to run, organize, and win," Mejia said.

Catch up quick: Mejia defeated nearly a dozen Democratic primary rivals in a February special election to succeed New Jersey Gov. Mikie Sherrill in Congress.

• The former progressive organizer was outraised by five of her primary rivals, bringing in just $420,000 to the $1.2 million raised by former Rep. Tom Malinowski, who finished second.
• Mejia's victory was widely considered an upset and was inadvertently spurred, at least in part, by AIPAC spending $2.3 million against Malinowski.

👀 What to watch: The super PAC will support only candidates who refuse to take corporate PAC money and who support banning members of Congress from trading stocks, according to the press release.

— Andrew Solender

[phkrause]

Blue wave math

Data: The Downballot and Sabato's Crystal Ball at the University of Virginia Center for Politics. Map: Kavya Beheraj/Axios Redistricting has helped House Republicans build a seawall that can withstand a roughly 5-point Democratic wave. Why it matters: Early readings are pointing to something twice that size — enough to wash away the GOP House majority, Axios' Hans Nichols reports. Democrats have been running roughly 10 points ahead of their 2024 presidential performance in special elections this year. A swing of that magnitude would produce a comfortable 230-205 Democratic majority, according to an Axios analysis of how the battle for the House would play out under different electoral scenarios. 🖊 Between the lines: Gerrymandering since the presidential election has given Republicans more breathing room, with GOP-drawn maps creating a net advantage of roughly nine seats. But some of those newly redrawn GOP seats rest on a potentially shaky assumption: that the 2026 electorate will look much like that of 2024. A national swing toward Democrats like the one in Trump's first midterm would overwhelm the GOP's redistricting defenses. The other side: If Republicans outperform Trump's 2024 numbers by 5 points across congressional districts, the new maps would give them a massive 253-182 majority. If 2026 simply looks like 2024 — with GOP candidates winning every district Trump would've carried under the new maps, including Trump districts where Democrats held on in 2024 — Republicans would net 16 seats, producing a 236-199 majority. 🏛 State of play: Two months before Election Day, Democrats can taste the House majority, provided two conditions hold: President Trump remains unpopular, and vulnerable Republicans stay close to him. They're privately giddy that Republicans are encouraging vulnerable incumbents to attend this week's GOP midterm convention in Dallas and lash themselves to the mast of HMS Trump. 💰 Republicans are banking on their massive money advantage and a Supreme Court ruling that allows them to coordinate their campaign dollars with individual candidates.

[phkrause]

Hakeem Jeffries' next fight

Photo illustration: Sarah Grillo/Axios. Photo: Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) faces mounting behind-the-scenes frustration from progressive lawmakers and candidates that's likely to burst into public view after the midterm elections, Axios' Andrew Solender writes. Why it matters: An influx of Democratic Socialists of America-aligned members in January will compound latent distrust of Jeffries that's festering in some corners of the Congressional Progressive Caucus. 🔎 Zoom in: Jeffries has made several recent moves that left Progressive Caucus members fuming, according to multiple lawmakers, candidates and aides. Medicare for All: Jeffries said on NBC's "Meet the Press" last month that Medicare for All is "not legislation ... that I support." He said in a later radio interview that he supports universal coverage, but there are "different paths" to get there. Kushner meeting: Jeffries' sit-down with President Trump's son-in-law rankled progressive groups. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) told reporters: "I don't know what that was about." Rule change: A proposal to penalize members who don't pay their dues to the party's campaign arm, or who break with leadership on procedural votes, was seen by progressives as a preemptive attempt to cut off dissent from the left.

[phkrause]

⭐️ Johnson spotlights Dems

Speaker Mike Johnson's super PAC is spending big to give little-known Democratic challengers main-character energy — or at least starring roles in 30-second campaign ads.

Why it matters: Trump wants to make the election about himself. The Congressional Leadership Fund — a super PAC affiliated with Johnson (R-La.) — is keeping the focus squarely on the Democrats running for Congress.

• 👉 The two strategies aren't necessarily at odds.
• But they offer different answers to the central question of the 2026 midterms: Is this election a referendum on Trump or a choice between individual candidates?

✅ Driving the news: Put CLF in the choice category.

• The super PAC has reserved new ads in eight congressional districts as it spends down its $175 million budget. It's now up in 15 districts.
• ✂️ The group is cutting bespoke attacks in a national campaign, with tailored ads for individual candidates and districts, drawing on on-the-ground research.
• The messaging varies, but the goal is the same: Elevate the Democratic candidate and define them before they can define themselves.

The other side: The Democrats' main super PAC, House Majority PAC, is currently spending in 11 races — with considerably more thematic consistency.

• HMP wants to tie Republican candidates to the president and his policies, arguing that two years of MAGA rule have left voters paying more for health care, groceries and gas.
• Democrats aren't trying to make their opponents famous so much as make them part of the Trump brand — and responsible for his policies.

🔎 Zoom in: In a 30-second ad attacking JoAnna Mendoza, who is challenging Rep. Juan Ciscomani (R-Ariz.) in AZ-06, CLF mentions Mendoza's name four times.

• "This is JoAnna Mendoza. Her job — an extreme liberal lobbyist," the narrator opens. "Because liberal lobbyist JoAnna Mendoza is not looking out for you."
• It's the first salvo in the $2.9 million CLF has reserved in AZ-06, according to AdImpact.

Democrats want to link GOP incumbents to the costs voters see in their everyday lives.

• "When I got the notice about my premiums going up, it stopped me in my tracks," a woman says as she jogs through a neighborhood in an HMP ad, part of a $6.4 million reservation to defeat Rep. Gabe Evans (R-Colo.).
• "For some they are doubling — all because Gabe Evans cast the deciding vote for Trump's billionaire tax cut."

🌎 Zoom out: The GOP super PAC is mostly playing defense. Democrats are leaning more heavily into offense.

• Nine of CLF's 15 ads are aimed at protecting Republican incumbents, while five target sitting Democratic lawmakers. One is focused on the open Nebraska seat being vacated by retiring Rep. Don Bacon (R-Neb.).
• By contrast, just two of HMP's first 11 ads are devoted to protecting Democratic incumbents. Seven target sitting Republican lawmakers, with the remaining two focused on open seats.

The bottom line: Republicans are offering concierge attack service — targeted messages for each Democratic candidate.

• The format of Democrats' ads is closer to "a noun, a verb and Donald Trump": Tie Republicans to the president and make them answer for his policies. 

— Hans Nichols

[phkrause]

🏛️ Congress gripped by AI panic

Illustration: Brendan Lynch/Axios

Anthropic insiders' warnings this week that AI could end humanity in the next decade have members of Congress frantically seeking answers and trying to cobble together some kind of response, Axios' Andrew Solender writes. Why it matters: Federal lawmakers are at the "concepts of a plan" stage, with congressional leaders showing little apparent urgency to mobilize. Some rank-and-file members in both parties say something must be done: "We should absolutely act, and act with urgency," Rep. Johnny Olszewski (D-Md.) told Axios. Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (R-Fla.) wrote Wednesday on X: "Congress needs to convene a special session on AI and what the future of the U.S. looks like." 🔬 Zoom in: Dozens of members of Congress — mostly Democrats, but a handful of Republicans as well — have since called for urgent action and floated a wide variety of legislative responses. Rep. Ted Lieu (D-Calif.), one of House Democrats' most vocal advocates for AI regulations, is pushing a bipartisan bill requiring AI developers to build a human-activated "kill switch" into any AI system. Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) said he and Rep. Greg Casar (D-Texas) "will soon be introducing legislation ... to pause advanced AI and ban superintelligence altogether." Others called for a more cautious approach, with Rep. Nathaniel Moran (R-Texas) writing that "we need AI to flourish" and calling for "deliberate, thoughtful, and prudent policymaking" to mitigate its risks. 🥊 Reality check: Republicans, who control both chambers of Congress, haven't indicated they're treating this as a pressing matter. The House is set to be in session for just four more days before Election Day, with lawmakers meeting on Capitol Hill next week before going on a six-week recess. 🔮 Many Democrats are speaking about the issue as something they'll tackle in 2027 if they take the majority in one or both chambers. Keep reading.

[phkrause]

🗳️ Inside the RNC's "election integrity" fight

Illustration: Brendan Lynch/Axios. Stock: Getty Images

53 days before midterms, Republicans are fighting roughly 200 legal battles over elections — including several cases in which the GOP isn't officially participating but is paying legal fees or advising on strategy, Axios' Brittany Gibson writes. White House political staff and the White House counsel's office are regularly updated on the RNC's work. Zoom in: The Republican National Committee's vast roster of cases includes efforts to tighten voter ID rules in Montana, decrease ballot drop-off locations in Georgia, increase scrutiny of voter lists in New Jersey and Delaware, and boost access for election observers and challengers elsewhere. Five RNC officials described the scope of the party's nationwide "election integrity" effort to Axios. They said strict enforcement of voting laws and preventing noncitizens from registering and voting are top priorities — even as analysts say there's no evidence of any systemic or significant voter fraud. Separately, the Trump administration is pursuing criminal charges for alleged voting law violations. Executive branch offices have told state election officials they're criminally liable for registering or allowing a noncitizen to vote. ICE also has been trying to obtain voter data to investigate cases. Keep reading.

[phkrause]

📺 September spending spree

Data: AdImpact; Note: AdImpact data includes dollars spent on video advertisements on broadcast, cable and social media as well as spending estimates on streaming platforms; Chart: Stef Kight/Axios Republicans are outspending Democrats in almost every battleground Senate race this month as Thune looks to the GOP's cash advantage to help hold his majority. Why it matters: The post-Labor Day rush is here, with $390 million (and climbing) of Senate campaign ads headed for voters' TVs, tablets and phone screens. 💔 But money can't buy you love — or guarantee you win an election. 🚗 Driving the news: Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton is finally getting the Texas-sized spending boost he needs. Thune-linked Texas PAC is now the biggest spender in the race this month, with more than $41 million worth of ads, per AdImpact data. There's more to come. 🧮 By the numbers: TV affiliates aren't at saturation levels, but they are getting close. The September ad spend could keep growing. In three crucial states — Ohio, Texas and Michigan — Republicans have reserved at least $10 million more in September advertising than Democrats. 🍑 Only in Georgia, a state where incumbent Democrat Jon Ossoff is now favored to win reelection, are Democrats outspending Republicans. Both parties are also treating Iowa and Alaska, two traditionally red states, as competitive, with Republicans holding the spending edge in both. 🔎 Zoom in: A new Trump-linked super PAC is jumping into the midterms — and spending big — giving Republicans another infusion of cash. No Going Back PAC, backed by Trump's MAGA Inc., has reserved roughly $41 million this month in Michigan, Ohio, North Carolina, New Hampshire, Alaska and Georgia, as well as in various House races, according to AdImpact. Separately, MAGA Inc. announced plans to spend $10 million in Texas. Elon Musk has opened his pocketbook, too. His super PAC has disclosed roughly $800,000 in spending to boost Republicans in the midterms. And the super PACs aligned with Thune and Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) are spending down their nine-figure war chests. Data: AdImpact; Note: AdImpact data includes dollars spent on video advertisements on broadcast, cable and social media as well as spending estimates on streaming platforms; Chart: Stef Kight/Axios 🌎 Zoom out: For the second cycle in a row, Ohio is on track to be the most expensive Senate race in the country, as Sen. Jon Husted (R-Ohio) and his allies try to thwart former Sen. Sherrod Brown's (D-Ohio) comeback bid. But that could change. North Carolina and Texas also have expensive media markets, and Trump's political operation is only beginning to tap its massive war chest. ⚡️ Flashback: At the start of the cycle, National Republican Senatorial Committee Chair Sen. Tim Scott (R-S.C.) warned Republicans from safe states not to expect the party to bail them out financially. But he also predicted that North Carolina would cost $700 million for both parties and that Maine could climb to $600 million. September spending shows Republicans are spending heavily on defense in other red states. Between the lines: Super PACs are by far the biggest spenders this month. But their dollars don't stretch nearly as far as money spent directly by candidates. Super PACs can pay twice — or more — what candidates pay for the same broadcast airtime. Most Democratic candidates have a clear advantage in so-called hard dollars, meaning they can spend less while potentially putting more ads on the air. The bottom line: Republicans know they can lose their majority. But if they do, it won't be for lack of money. — Stef W. Kight and Hans Nichols

[phkrause]

AI angst grows

House Speaker Mike Johnson at the GOP midterm convention yesterday in Dallas. Photo: Kevin Dietsch / Getty Images

✉️ A letter is circulating among House members urging Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) to bring back the House "immediately" and keep it in session until Congress passes AI safeguards, we've learned. Why it matters: Such drastic action has been proposed by members in both parties this week after current and former Anthropic researchers went public with warnings that AI could kill off humanity in the next decade. ‼️ The letter to Johnson, drafted by Sam Liccardo (D-Calif.), says "urgent action" is needed "to address catastrophic risk posed by advanced artificial intelligence," according to a copy we obtained. The letter is co-signed by Reps. George Whitesides (D-Calif.) and Lori Trahan (D-Mass.) and was still being circulated this afternoon. Driving the news: The letter calls for the House to "return to Washington immediately and remain in session until Congress advances meaningful, bipartisan AI safeguards." It notes that the House, which reconvenes Monday, is scheduled to be in session just one more week before departing for a month and a half, returning Nov. 9. ✅ Reality check: Despite growing urgency from rank-and-file members to respond to the existential threat allegedly posed by AI, congressional leadership has largely offered up silence. Johnson is planning a vote next week on a bill to prevent data centers from driving up Americans' energy costs but has offered no indication that the House will vote on any AI regulations before Election Day. A spokesperson for Johnson did not provide comment. Between the lines: The letter points to the myriad bipartisan bills that have been proposed to regulate AI, arguing they "deserve consideration, public debate, thoughtful amendment, and action." They include the AI Kill Switch Act, introduced by Reps. Ted Lieu (D-Calif.) and Nathaniel Moran (R-Texas), which would require all AI systems to maintain some way for humans to slow or shut them down. Another is the FRONTIER Act, proposed by Reps. Jay Obernolte (R-Calif.) and Trahan to create a national framework regulating the development and deployment of new AI models. 📗 The bottom line: "To our children who will have read a post-apocalyptic history, 'Why Congress Slept' — likely written by agentic AI — our inaction will be inexplicable, and unforgivable," the letter says. — Andrew Solender

[phkrause]

🤑 September spending spree

Data: AdImpact. Chart: Stef Kight/Axios Republicans are outspending Democrats in almost every battleground Senate race this month as Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) looks to the GOP's cash advantage to help hold his majority. Why it matters: The post-Labor Day rush is here, with $390 million (and climbing) of Senate campaign ads headed for voters' TVs, tablets and phone screens, Axios' Stef W. Kight and Hans Nichols report. By the numbers: In three crucial states — Ohio, Texas and Michigan — Republicans have reserved at least $10 million more in September advertising than Democrats. 🍑 Only in Georgia, a state where incumbent Democrat Jon Ossoff is now favored to win reelection, are Democrats outspending Republicans. Keep reading.

[phkrause]

House Speaker Mike Johnson says Trump's $5,000 'dividend' needs congressional approval

President Donald Trump's proposal to send $5,000 to every American adult if his Republican Party maintains control of the House and Senate in the November election needs congressional approval, House Speaker Mike Johnson said Sunday, while pledging to try to make it happen. Read More.

[phkrause]

D.C.'s AI paralysis

Illustration: Brendan Lynch/Axios. Stock: Getty Images

President Trump is as all-in on AI as a politician could be: all gas, no brakes, and zero interest in hand-wringing about dystopian risks or public disdain. Democrats are as conflicted on AI as a party could be: skeptical of the labs, spooked by their warnings, but split on whether to shut it all down. Why it matters: This staggering divide makes consensus on federal AI regulation almost unimaginable this year — and probably through early 2029, regardless of who wins control of Congress, Axios' Zachary Basu writes. 🦾 Zoom in: Trump has governed as the AI president from Day 1, applying the same doctrine to models and the data centers that power them — build faster, regulate less, beat China. Speaking in Ireland yesterday, he dismissed new safety warnings as the work of "a lot of negative forces ... bringing up things that won't happen" — and reduced the stakes to one line: "Whoever wins AI wins." It's unclear which "negative forces" Trump has in mind: Calls to slow the race — or "pace the frontier" — are now coming from the leaders of America's premier AI labs, including Anthropic, OpenAI, SpaceXAI and Google. Between the lines: Trump's accelerationist allies, including venture capitalists in Silicon Valley, see the safety alarms as a cynical ploy by the field's dominant players to lock in favorable regulations. David Sacks, Trump's former AI czar and a leading voice for the administration's hands-off approach, has a simple answer: Slow yourselves down. If OpenAI and Anthropic truly think the frontier is moving too fast, Sacks argues, they can decelerate on their own without using Washington to force competitors to do the same. 🏛️ House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) echoed Sacks' argument that the labs don't need Congress to slow themselves down — and rejected calls for an emergency moratorium. Johnson said on NBC's "Meet the Press" that he'd recall the House and put AI regulation to a vote "if we had the solution," but warned Congress against rushing into rules it doesn't yet understand. His preferred first step is a summit: Johnson said yesterday he wants Trump, congressional leaders and the heads of the major AI labs in a room as soon as possible to hammer out a common approach to safety. The other side: Congressional Democrats are coalescing around urgency, but have no comparable doctrine on what to actually do. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries says his caucus will meet tomorrow to debate what action to take, while former President Barack Obama is privately urging the party to make AI a top priority. 🔭 The policy spectrum is vast — and doesn't neatly map onto what the labs themselves are asking for. On the progressive end, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Rep. Greg Casar (D-Texas) want to ban superintelligence outright, pause advanced AI development and threaten violators with up to 20 years in prison. Others are reaching for more conventional Washington fixes: Sen. Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.) wants a bipartisan AI select committee with subpoena power, while Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) is demanding that OpenAI open its models to federal safety reviews. What to watch: The unprecedented push for restraint from inside the AI industry, colliding with deepening public unease, could scramble this political stalemate. Michigan GOP Senate nominee Mike Rogers, a Trump ally running in a swing state, said Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei's new warning convinced him "we must slow down development" so government can catch up. Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) is investigating AI's "existential risk," while Sens. John Thune (R-S.D.) and Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) are pursuing a narrower plan requiring companies to test and report catastrophic risks. 🖊 Reality check: Political pressure and lobbying could crack open the door to narrow bipartisan measures, though any meaningful regulation would still have to survive Trump's veto pen.

[phkrause]

McConnell returns to the Senate for the first time since his June hospitalization

WASHINGTON (AP) — Republican Sen. Mitch McConnell of Kentucky returned to the Senate to vote on Monday for the first time in three months, looking noticeably more frail after he was hospitalized for a June fall in his home.

https://apnews.com/article/mitch-mcconnell-senate-return-abe03e84e30a174da4076385692b5751?

[phkrause]

🤖 Thune's AI push

Majority Leader John Thune is asserting Congress' prerogative to act on AI — but he's urging a "light touch" even in the face of "consequential risks."

Why it matters: On his first day back after a five-week break, Thune (R-S.D.) outlined his vision for congressional action on an issue President Trump has dismissed as a "hoax."

• 👉 "Congress has a job to do," Thune said.
• "I think there are some potential consequential risks associated with AI," Thune told reporters when asked if he believes AI poses an existential threat to humanity. He added, "Guardrails there make sense to me" about cutting-edge, frontier AI models.
• 🚨 But Thune also said that "there are always people who are creating a worst-case-scenario-type conversation out there."

🚗 Driving the news: An AI panic is rippling through Congress, but mostly on the Democratic side, with House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) calling to "slow down the pace of development" of AI to avoid a potentially catastrophic outcome.

• Publicly, Trump is professing not to be concerned and insists that he should have the sole authority to regulate AI.
• "The only control or 'guardrails' that AI needs is a STRONG AND SMART (High IQ!) PRESIDENT, and the U.S.A. has that, in spades," he posted on his Truth Social account this morning.

🌎 Zoom out: Republicans aren't questioning Trump's ability to lead the country's approach to AI regulation, but they are suggesting that Congress has a role to play.

• And they aren't ruling out legislation.
• "So we may need to do something," Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) said. "But there are existing guardrails, and corporate responsibility is a big part of this."

Zoom in: Thune said he spoke with Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) on Saturday night about their AI bill, which would force companies creating frontier AI models to guard against catastrophic risks and submit to federal oversight.

• Thune said he has been working with Commerce chair Ted Cruz (R-Texas) to reintroduce the bill "hopefully soon."
• House GOP leaders, meanwhile, have given no indication they plan to keep the chamber in session after this week to work on AI-related legislation.
• "I don't know that staying in more weeks in September is going to be the catalyst for that," Rep. Jay Obernolte (R-Calif.), the lead Republican on the FRONTIER Act, told us.

Between the lines: Before this weekend, much of the AI debate in Washington — and in Senate races — was focused on data centers and the amount of electricity they consume.

• 🗳️ Republicans, as well as the White House, are eager to convince voters that they won't face higher utility bills caused by data centers and their need for megawatts.
• Thune left open the possibility of the Senate voting on a version of the House's Ratepayer Protection Act, which is aimed at ensuring communities are not forced to pay more for increased energy use by data centers.
• The House is expected to vote on the bill tomorrow.

The bottom line: Thune is signaling he's open to some regulation that wouldn't stifle innovation.

• "I think you also want to make sure that the more advanced threats can be mitigated," he told reporters.
• 👟 "I do think we are in a race with China, and I think there's huge upside, obviously, with AI as well." 

— Stef W. Kight, Hans Nichols and Kate Santaliz

[phkrause]

GOP chilly on checks

Data: OMB; Chart: Erin Davis/Axios Visuals Senate Republicans are doubtful — and, in some cases, dismissive — of Trump's proposal to give Americans $5,000 checks if Republicans keep control of Congress. Why it matters: Trump's proposal isn't dead on arrival. But Republicans aren't exactly lining up behind it either. ⚖️ "I am withholding judgment on the bill until I see their list of pay-fors," Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.) said. "I don't support going and borrowing $1.2 trillion to be able to write the checks." 👀 "I would need to see details on it," Sen. Ted Budd (R-N.C.) said. Sen. Steve Daines (R-Mont.) said he wasn't sure about the mechanics of the proposal but that he's "also worrying about $40 trillion in debt." "You know, there's no specific proposal out there," Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) said. "And obviously, however that were to come together, Congress would have a big role in determining." 🔎 Zoom in: There are two massive unknowns about the "Trump Dividend" the president promised in Dallas last week: eligibility and price tag. Vice President Vance has suggested that wealthy Americans wouldn't receive the payment. If every "every adult citizen in the United States" were eligible, as Trump suggested, it could cost some $1.3 trillion. That would be more than three times what the U.S. collects annually from tariffs and other customs duties and fees. 🤔 The intrigue: Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.), who frequently defers to Trump, said yesterday that Congress would have to approve the payments. Asked in NBC's "Meet the Press" if he'd commit that the checks will be sent, Johnson said, "I commit that Congress will work through it and find consensus on that like they have to do everything else." Rep. Keith Self (R-Texas) told us: "Well, if it happens, I'm recommending to people that they put it away in order to pay for the additional inflation. We will see."  — Hans Nichols, Stef W. Kight and Erin Davis

[phkrause]

🤝 Rare bipartisan energy

Illustration: Shoshana Gordon / Axios

Lawmakers who want to regulate AI are doing something unusual as Congress barrels towards a lengthy recess with no tangible solution in sight: They're working across the aisle. Why it matters: Bipartisanship is increasingly elusive on Capitol Hill, but it remains a crucial first step for action in a Senate that requires 60 votes to pass most legislation. 🤖 The latest example: Sens. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) are pressing congressional leadership for a vote on their bill to establish a federal program to assess and monitor AI systems. ‼️ "Recent incidents of rogue AI agent swarms hacking into public websites and systems have removed lingering doubts concerning the ability of these agents to wreak havoc on our cyber infrastructure," the pair wrote in a letter first obtained by us. State of play: Several new bipartisan efforts to regulate AI have cropped up in the week since several current and former employees at Anthropic and OpenAI went public with concerns about the existential risks posed by their own products. Reps. Russell Fry (R-S.C.) and Suhas Subramanyam (D-Va.) are founding a caucus focused on AI small businesses, called the Innovators Caucus, as we reported yesterday. Among the group's stated goals is starting work on a federal framework to regulate AI, as well as bringing small businesses to the AI policymaking table. ☢️ The doomsday warnings have also breathed new life into existing bipartisan proposals to mitigate the dangers of AI. Rep. Ted Lieu (D-Calif.) has been publicly hawking his bill with Rep. Nathaniel Moran (R-Texas) to require AI companies to include a human-activated "kill switch" in their systems. Reps. Lori Trahan (D-Mass.) and Jay Obernolte (R-Calif.) have also been championing their comprehensive AI regulation bill, the Frontier Act. Yes, but: House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) has signaled that his chamber will not take any action on the AI front before the House leaves for a six-week recess that doesn't end until after Election Day. 👉 Johnson warned in a CNN interview Sunday that Congress should "not smother American innovation" with overly burdensome AI regulations. President Trump has gone even further in dismissing the urgency of federal AI regulations, writing in a Truth Social post yesterday: "AI taking over the World, destroying Humanity, and all other things bad, is a HOAX." 👀 What to watch: House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) has sounded a considerably more dire note on the issue. A potential House Democratic majority next year may be the place where AI regulation finally finds its footing on Capitol Hill.  — Andrew Solender

[phkrause]

🚨 Epstein files 2.0

🥊 The Epstein files fight that consumed the House last year is threatening to engulf Republicans all over again.

Why it matters: Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) is now just one Republican away from having the support he needs to force another politically painful Epstein vote — and he and his allies are hunting for the final GOP signature.

• 📝 Retiring Rep. Ralph Norman (R-S.C.) signed Massie's new discharge petition yesterday, joining Massie and Rep. Nancy Mace (R-S.C.).
• Massie and Mace told us they're actively targeting retiring Republicans and members in vulnerable districts for the fourth GOP signature that will get them the magic number to force a vote on the Epstein Files Transparency Act II.
• Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-Colo.), one of four Republicans who bucked Trump and GOP leadership to sign Massie's first Epstein petition last year, told us she's considering signing again and has been having conversations with Massie.

🖼️ The big picture: The push is reviving one of the most disruptive fights of Trump's second term for House Republicans.

• Last year's Epstein discharge petition became a monthslong headache for Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) and the White House before ultimately securing 218 signatures and forcing the issue onto the House floor. The bill passed with almost unanimous support in the House.
• The Epstein Files Transparency Act II would enforce and expand the release of remaining files at DOJ.

✅ Reality check: Even if Massie locks down the Republican support he needs this week, the House is set to leave Washington on Thursday until after the November midterms, meaning any potential floor showdown would come postelection.

— Kate Santaliz

[phkrause]

Powerful AI holdouts

Illustration: Sarah Grillo/Axios. Stock: Getty Images

More than two dozen members of Congress and governors admitted to Axios that they don't use AI or have rarely done so — even as they come under growing pressure to regulate it, Axios' Holly Otterbein, Andrew Solender and Stef W. Kight write. Why it matters: That striking admission — particularly among older, influential lawmakers — comes amid calls for an AI slowdown and warnings within the industry that it could end humanity if left unchecked. Critics argue that it's impossible for politicians to grasp how rapidly the technology is changing — and the threats or scientific breakthroughs it might unleash — if they don't use it or even dismiss it. One House Democrat called it "f*cking absurd," arguing: "Anyone who's overseeing this has to be someone who's a regular user." 🔎 Zoom in: Several lawmakers, including those steeped in seniority and in charge of key committees, told Axios they simply haven't tried AI. "Heavens no," said Sen. Roger Wicker (R-Miss.), 75, chair of the Armed Services Committee, when asked if he uses AI. "Personally? I don't think I've ever used it," said Rep. Frank Pallone (D-N.J.), 74, the ranking member of the House Energy and Commerce Committee. After we spoke with him, Pallone shared a statement through a spokesperson that said: "You don't need to do drugs like heroin to know they should be regulated." "No," Sen. Mazie Hirono (D-Hawai'i), 78, said when asked if she uses AI, but that "doesn't mean I won't." She added: "I don't think we in Congress have gotten quite our handle on what we should do and how much AI we should be regulating." A GOP senator, speaking anonymously to offer candid remarks about their colleagues, told Axios that the number who use AI is "not very high." Some politicians were unsure if they've ever used AI — or said they've only done so by accident. "I don't know. I can't remember," said Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Calif.), 88. Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine), 73, said she doesn't seek out AI on her own, but that "it pops up on my phone occasionally." 💥 Friction point: Some members of Congress were irked or surprised that colleagues don't use a technology they're seeking to regulate. "Are you serious?" Sen. John Hickenlooper (D-Colo.), 74, said in response to our question. "I use it for everything! I can't believe there's a senator that doesn't use AI." Rep. Don Beyer (D-Va.), 76, went back to school to get a master's degree in machine learning and said he prefers Claude.

[phkrause]

House votes for a third time to end the Iran war as conflict drags on In a 220-204 vote, the House approved the resolution late Tuesday that would halt President Donald Trump’s ability to continue military action without congressional approval. None of the resolutions have made it to the president’s desk, where Trump would almost certainly veto the measure. Read more.

Why this matters: In the previous House actions, four Republicans joined all Democrats voting to bring an end to the conflict. A few more Republicans joined Tuesday, including GOP lawmakers from battleground Iowa, Rep. Zachary Nunn and Rep. Mariannette Miller-Meeks, and retiring Rep. Nancy Mace of South Carolina. The action is likely the last House vote on the Iran war ahead of the midterm elections, where the conflict overseas is playing a substantial role in the political campaigns.

RELATED COVERAGE ➤ Trump administration plans to send powerful bombs to Israel in $2.8 billion weapons sale  Iran war has cost the US more than $38B, budget office says  US strips millions in military aid from Europe and Mideast to back Trump-aligned nations in Americas  FBI chief Kash Patel defends hiring policy changes on prostitution, bestiality at fiery hearing  House panel recommends contempt charge for billionaire Leon Black in Epstein probe  Senate blocks cryptocurrency regulation as Democrats push back on Trump investments  Trump slams the Supreme Court for rejecting his push to restrict mail ballots  Trump’s push to restrict mail ballots has failed. Other efforts to reshape the midterms are ongoing  US acknowledges for the first time that it has deployed weapons in space  Kennedy Center will close for renovations after judge blocks returning Trump’s name to building  Americans value press freedom, but new surveys show support for restrictions in certain cases