Connect with us

News

Government funding bills not ‘home runs’, Johnson says, but include GOP policies

Published

on

Government funding bills not ‘home runs’, Johnson says, but include GOP policies

Congressional leaders are preparing to force government funding legislation worth $1.7 trillion into law next week as the federal government staggers toward yet another shutdown deadline.

Unless Congress acts, about 20 percent of the federal government’s domestic operations would shut down on March 2 — giving lawmakers just a few days to avert a partial closure. The debate is part of a larger saga on Capitol Hill over federal spending, on issues that include government shutdowns as well as support for Ukraine and Israel.

House Speaker Mike Johnson (La.) told members of his Republican conference Friday night that some elements of the spending bills lawmakers will consider are “not home runs and grand slams,” according to a partial transcript of the GOP conference call obtained by The Washington Post, but carried plenty of wins on policy and spending cuts with which the GOP should be pleased.

“I don’t think anybody on this call thinks that we’re going to be able to use the appropriations process to fundamentally remake major areas of policy,” Johnson said. “If you’re expecting a lot of home runs and grand slams here, I admit you’ll be disappointed. But we will be able to secure a number of policy victories, both in bill text and report language, or other provisions and cuts that severely undermine the [Biden] administration’s programs and objectives,” he said, without providing specific details. These bills will be littered with singles and doubles that we should be proud of, especially in our small majority.”

Not all Republicans were pleased with the outcome. “We are not winning,” said one person familiar with the call, who, like others in this report, spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly. Johnson did not discuss specific policy provisions on the call, multiple people said.

Advertisement

Multiple people familiar with House and Senate negotiations said leaders were nearing an agreement on legislation to fund the departments of Agriculture, Energy, Veterans Affairs, Transportation, and Housing and Urban Development. Spending authority for those agencies is set to expire next weekend. The people spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss fragile negotiations.

Funding for the remaining 80 percent of the federal government — including the departments of Commerce, Justice, State, Defense, Homeland Security, Interior, Labor, Education, and Health and Human Services — expires on March 9, but lawmakers may need more time to piece together legislation for those agencies, the people said.

“We have a serious issue with the clock,” Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart (R-Fla.), one of the chief House negotiators, told The Post on Friday. “We’ve been given basically no time. But within that, we are hustling through it. My team has been working around-the-clock, literally around-the-clock. I mean, trading papers at 2 in the morning.”

Congressional leaders are expected to consider a stopgap funding bill — called a continuing resolution, or CR — to maintain the budgets of those agencies at current spending levels until mid-March, the people added. It would be the fourth such law passed since Sept. 30, when the last fiscal year ended.

Congress funds the government through 12 spending bills, called appropriations. The funding that expires on March 2 represents four of those bills.

Advertisement

Diaz-Balart said that if the House and Senate were able to approve funds for those agencies, and negotiations on the rest continue to advance at a steady pace, there was a possibility the other deliberations could also be finalized. He declined to answer questions about specific policy priorities.

All the plans, though, are tenuous at best. One person familiar with the negotiations said Republicans were bracing for a social media post or statement from former president Donald Trump that could derail the spending agreements — just as Trump did to kill a Senate immigration compromise only weeks ago.

Other Republicans are eyeing the relationship between Johnson and the archconservative House Freedom Caucus, a band of GOP rebels who have called on the speaker to shut down the government unless he can win spending cuts or hard-right policy provisions, called “riders” because they ride along in often unrelated legislation.

The Freedom Caucus on Tuesday wrote to Johnson with a list of 21 rider demands, including policies to eliminate Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas’s salary, block key components of President Biden’s climate agenda and cut off funding for the World Health Organization and several U.N. relief agencies.

The group has also blocked procedural votes on the House floor to protest what members consider excessive government spending. That has required Johnson to lean instead on the House’s Democratic minority to move legislation, including two previous stopgap government funding measures — further upsetting the hard-right caucus.

Advertisement

The far right toppled McCarthy over spending. What has it gotten them?

Freedom Caucus members say they would prefer Congress pass a year-long continuing resolution, which would trigger automatic across-the-board spending cuts that would take effect in May.

Under those cuts, called sequestration, every domestic federal program — save for Social Security, Medicare, veterans’ and debt payments — would face a 7 to 10 percent budget cut. The speaker should use that threat, Freedom Caucus members argue, to extract steeper spending cuts from Democrats in the appropriations bills.

“If the Democrats know, and they do, that we will not risk a government shutdown, then all they have to do is say no to whatever we ask for, and then we’re going to surrender, because we won’t suffer government shutdown. That is the bottom line,” Rep. Bob Good (R-Va.), chair of the Freedom Caucus, told The Post. “The only leverage you have when you only control one house is to refuse to make a deal and to refuse to fund the government under the conditions at which the Democrats are demanding that you fund it. Don’t give Biden the money for the policies that you disagree with. And we’re not willing to do that, apparently.”

Johnson and GOP defense hawks in the House have rejected that approach because sequestration would not exempt defense spending.

Advertisement

A spokesperson for Johnson said in a statement that the speaker “has held regular meetings with members, including appropriators and House Freedom Caucus members, on the status of [the appropriations bills].”

In January, Johnson made the policy riders a priority for House negotiators after he agreed to a top-line spending amount with Senate Majority Leader Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) that some conservatives said was too high. But negotiators have jettisoned most of those proposals, the people familiar with the talks said, because many were too inflammatory to garner support from House Democrats. They would also surely perish in the Democratic-controlled Senate, which has to adopt the spending measures as well.

Senate Democrats on Friday also pressured Johnson to consider additional spending legislation to fund emergency assistance for Ukraine. The upper chamber this month passed a $95 billion defense spending bill that included money for Ukraine, Israel and other U.S. allies.

The speaker rejected that legislation, favoring instead an approach that splits Ukraine funding from other aid, or pairs it with harsh Trump-era immigration policies.

“Speaker Johnson, come to Ukraine,” Schumer said Friday at a news conference in Lviv, Ukraine, alongside the country’s president, Volodymyr Zelensky. “See what we saw, witness what we’ve witnessed, and we’re confident that if you did that, you would understand how important it is to have this aid.”

Advertisement

News

Bessent on Trump’s crypto earnings: “I don’t think there’s an appearance problem”

Published

on

Bessent on Trump’s crypto earnings: “I don’t think there’s an appearance problem”

In an exclusive interview with CBS News on Thursday, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said he doesn’t believe the recent disclosure of President Trump’s billions in crypto earnings is problematic for the president. 

“I don’t think there’s an appearance problem,” Bessent told CBS News anchor and MoneyWatch correspondent Kelly O’Grady regarding Mr. Trump’s earnings.  

According to a financial disclosure released earlier this week, Mr. Trump has earned approximately $1.4 billion from his crypto ventures since beginning his second term. Those include his “meme coin” $TRUMP and earnings from World Liberty Financial, a cryptocurrency company backed by the president and his family.

Congressional Democrats have criticized Mr. Trump’s crypto windfall, arguing it presents a conflict of interest since his administration has sought to loosen regulations on cryptocurrency.

“This is an innovation presidency,” Bessent told CBS News. “So whether it’s digital access, whether it’s AI, whether it’s everything that is going on in the tech ecosystem that, you know, all Americans are benefiting from that.”

Advertisement

White House spokesperson Anna Kelly told CBS News on Tuesday that “there are no conflicts of interest” in the disclosure.

In his interview with CBS News, Bessent also touched on the latest developments with the tax-deferred Trump Accounts and his outlook for the U.S. economy as it grapples with the impacts of the Iran war.  

Economic relief is coming for American families, Bessent believes

The Treasury secretary said his message to Americans who are experiencing strain at the grocery store and at the pump wrought by the Iran war is that “we’re going to get to the other side of this.”

Since the war began in late February, halts to shipping traffic in the critical Strait of Hormuz, which handles roughly 20% of the world’s global oil supply, have led to rising gas prices, which have in turn accelerated inflation and raised costs more broadly. In May, the annual inflation rate rose to 4.2%, according to the Labor Department, its highest level since April 2023. 

The average price of a gallon of regular gasoline on Thursday was $3.83, according to AAA. At the height of the war, gas prices topped $4.50 a gallon, but have steadily declined in recent weeks as oil prices return to near prewar levels and the U.S. and Iran negotiate over a more permanent end to the war

Advertisement

Bessent said he is hopeful that the average drops to $3 a gallon by Labor Day.

“Gasoline prices are a little stickier on the way down,” Bessent said. “We’re trying to give the gasoline retailers a little bit of a nudge. We’re telling them we’re watching them. We’ve had some good uptake from some of the bigger retailers from some of the bigger retailers in terms of what they want to do for consumers.” 

Thursday’s jobs report from the Bureau of Labor Statistics showed that U.S. employers added 57,000 jobs in June, far below what economists had predicted, but the unemployment rate held steady, dipping slightly to 4.2% from 4.3% the month before. However, the report found that annual wage growth was 3.5%, below the rate of inflation.

Bessent described the discrepancy between wage gains and inflation as a “short-term spike,” and said he expects to see oil and energy prices continue to drop.  

“I would expect, perhaps, as soon as this month, we’re going to see real wage gains,” Bessent said.

Advertisement

Asked whether the stock market’s strong performance in recent months, or the real-world pressure facing many Americans, is a more realistic view of the state of the U.S. economy, Bessent said he believes the market’s strong performance will be predictive of the direction the economy takes.

“The stock market lives in the future. So what the stock market is telling us is, presumably, what I am saying today, that we’ll get to the other side of this,” Bessent said. “Rates will come down and then we will be back up to real wage gain. So both can be true.”

Trump Accounts a tool to create “financial literacy,” Bessent says

The White House announced this week that beginning on July 4, Americans can begin contributing to Trump Accounts, a federal program launched earlier this year designed to help children under 18 invest money in the stock market and build savings before they reach adulthood, similar to how adults save for retirement.

“Thirty-eight percent of American households have no investment in our great equity markets, and we want everyone to share, you know, in the bounty that is the U.S.,” Bessent said. “In our innovation and our capital markets, and, you know, the economic engine, greatest in the history of the world. So, you know, over time, I would think that that 38% number would move toward zero. And then the other thing too is financial literacy.”

According to Bessent, more than 6 million Trump Accounts have been opened so far, and there are approximately 70 million children in the U.S. eligible for them.

Advertisement

On July 4, the federal government will begin contributing $1,000 to accounts for eligible children who are born between Jan. 1, 2025, and Dec. 31, 2028. The Trump Accounts were part of the White House’s “big, beautiful bill” legislation passed last year.  

Bessent noted how wealthy philanthropists, organizations and states can also donate to the accounts, even by contributing public stock. Last year, Michael Dell, who founded Dell Technologies, and his wife Susan Dell announced they would donate $6.25 billion to the accounts, or $250 per person.

“I would expect that we are going to see, again from these philanthropic families and institutions and companies, I would expect that we would see the lower-income profile families, actually the accounts will be topped up more,” Bessent said.

Bessent said the accounts could also build throughout adulthood and be rolled into an individual retirement account.

“We want them to really understand the power of long-term compounding,” Bessent said of the families who take part in the program. “That you’ll own a share of a company, that many people have – bank deposits. They’re used to getting interest, they’re used to paying interest. So what we want them to understand is, what does a piece of the action feel like?”

Advertisement

Continue Reading

News

Ukraine latest / Limits of military might / Can major powers regain dominance? : Sources & Methods

Published

on

Ukraine latest / Limits of military might / Can major powers regain dominance? : Sources & Methods

A view taken on June 24 shows a heavily damaged multi-story apartment building following a recent attack, which local Russian-installed officials called a Ukrainian drone strike, in the town of Gorlivka in the Donetsk region, Russian-controlled Ukraine, amid the ongoing Russian-Ukrainian conflict.

AFP via Getty Images


hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

AFP via Getty Images

Four years in and Ukraine is still giving Russia a run for its money. Four months in and Iran shows no sign of bowing to U.S. demands. 

What do Russia’s fight with Ukraine and the U.S. war with Iran tell us about the limits of military might?

Host Mary Louise Kelly speaks with NPR’s Ukraine Correspondent Joanna Kakissis about the overnight attack in Kyiv, which comes on the heels of Ukraine’s drone assaults in Moscow. NPR National Security Correspondent Greg Myre joins them to talk about what the conflicts in Ukraine
and Iran say about military might and whether major powers can regain dominance. 

Advertisement

Email the show at sourcesandmethods@npr.org

NPR+ supporters hear every episode without sponsor messages and unlock access to our complete archive. Sign up at plus.npr.org.

Continue Reading

News

Newsom’s office responds to SCOTUS ruling on women’s sports as California faces ongoing trans athlete wave

Published

on

Newsom’s office responds to SCOTUS ruling on women’s sports as California faces ongoing trans athlete wave

California Gov. Gavin Newsom’s office has responded after the U.S. Supreme Court made a historic ruling on trans athletes in women’s sports on Tuesday.

The court ruled 6-3 to uphold state laws that protect women’s sports from biological male trans athletes. California is one of 23 states in the country that don’t have laws to protect women’s sports, and since 2014, has had a law in place to protect the rights of males to compete against females.

Advertisement

A spokesperson for Newsom’s office said the Supreme Court ruling will not impact California’s current setup.

SUPREME COURT MAKES RULING ON TRANS ATHLETES IN WOMEN’S SPORTS

California Gov. Gavin Newsom speaks during a press conference in Hayward, California, on March 2, where he criticized President Donald Trump’s decision to strike Iran. (Tayfun Coskun/Anadolu via Getty Images)

“The Supreme Court’s decision does not affect California’s laws. The state remains committed to ensuring every Californian, including the LGBTQ community, is met with dignity and respect,” the spokesperson told Fox News Digital.

A source within Newsom’s office provided Fox News Digital a bulleted list titled “As a Governor, Governor Newsom has the strongest record in the country on protecting and expanding transgender rights.”

Advertisement

The list included several bragging points, including “making it easier to update gender markers on official documents,” and “appointed multiple trans judges.”

The list concludes by pointing out, “California is one of 22 states that have laws requiring transgender students to participate in sports consistent with their gender identity. California passed this law in 2013 (AB 1266) and it was signed into law by Governor Jerry Brown.”

Newsom’s state was ravaged by a trans athlete national media crisis in May, for the second year in a row and third time in total in one year, as prominent trans athlete AB Hernandez competed in girls’ sports.

Hernandez won two track and field state titles for the second straight year. Ahead of the first round of the state tournament in early May, “Save Girls Sports” protesters led by former NCAA women’s soccer player Sophia Lorey scheduled a press conference near the competition grounds.

AB HERNANDEZ ADVANCES IN CALIFORNIA STATE CHAMPIONSHIP AS SAVE GIRLS’ SPORTS ACTIVISTS RALLY NEARBY

Advertisement

A source within Newsom’s office previously addressed the press conference in the days leading up to the event in a statement provided to Fox News Digital, prompting controversy and criticism from locals.

“The Governor has said discussions on this issue should be guided by fairness, dignity, and respect. He rejects the right wing’s cynical attempt to weaponize this debate as an excuse to vilify individual kids. The Governor’s position is simple: stand with all kids and stand up to bullies,” the statement read.

The governor faced mass backlash from activists across the country for his office’s statement. The controversy only exploded the very next week when it was revealed the California Interscholastic Federation (CIF) re-implemented a pilot program that bumped every girl who finished behind the trans athlete up by one spot on the podium. The change resulted in now-infamous imagery of Hernandez sharing podium spots with the female second-place finishers.

President Donald Trump’s Department of Justice is engaged in Title IX lawsuits against education agencies in California for its policies that allow trans athletes in girls’ high school sports. The lawsuit was officially launched in July after Hernandez won two state finals in triple jump and high jump, and won second place in long jump, at last year’s championships.

Newsom previously declared that he believed males competing in girls’ sports is “deeply unfair” during an episode of his podcast with the late Charlie Kirk in March 2025.

Advertisement

Then in July 2025, Newsom spoke about the issue in an interview on the “Shawn Ryan Show” saying he has been “amazingly frustrated by it” and that he regularly encounters parents who are angry about the state’s policies at his children’s soccer games.

“Every parent coming up says, ‘It’s so unfair.’ Like ‘Whoa,’ like everywhere I went, progressively-minded people, not bigots, that are champions of trans policy like I am, but didn’t like the sports. They were like ‘come on man, you got to figure this out,’” Newsom said.

Newsom added that his allies in the LGBTQ caucus were “furious” with him after he made his initial comments in March while speaking to Kirk, and even recalled an alleged conversation with President Donald Trump about it.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

“Trump is having the time of his life, and I assure you he is because we’ve had conversations on this topic,” Newsom said.

Advertisement

“And now he’s suing and threatening us, and they’re just, and you know, I’m the poster child,” Newsom added. “But I do think we have to address that issue.” 

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending