Connect with us

Politics

How Johnson pulled off another impossible win with just 1-vote margin on $9.4B spending cut bill

Published

on

How Johnson pulled off another impossible win with just 1-vote margin on .4B spending cut bill

Join Fox News for access to this content

Plus special access to select articles and other premium content with your account – free of charge.

By entering your email and pushing continue, you are agreeing to Fox News’ Terms of Use and Privacy Policy, which includes our Notice of Financial Incentive.

Please enter a valid email address.

Having trouble? Click here.

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

It came down to one vote last Thursday afternoon.

Advertisement

Again.

That’s often the case in the House of Representatives. The GOP sports a modest eight-vote margin in the House. 220-212 with three vacancies. Republicans can only lose three votes and still pass a bill without Democratic assistance.

REPORTER’S NOTEBOOK: WHY THE SENATE IS UNLIKELY TO DEBATE THE ‘BIG, BEAUTIFUL BILL’ UNTIL NEXT WEEK 

Capitol Building, NPR, PBS (llison Robbert/Bloomberg via Getty Images; Eva Marie Uzcategui/Bloomberg via Getty Images)

And when the House closed the roll call, lawmakers voted 214-212 to strip USAID and public broadcasting of $9.4 billion. This was the first “rescissions” bill by the House. An effort to claw back money which lawmakers just green-lit in March. But flip one vote, and the measure would have collapsed. A 213-213 vote doesn’t get it. By rule, ties fail in the House.

Advertisement

The bill represented the first chance for the GOP to make good on proposed cuts from DOGE. From a constitutional standpoint, DOGE can only recommend cuts. Congress has authority over spending. That means lawmakers must vote on every dollar. Lawmakers appropriated the money, but they must also vote to take it back.

No vote, no cuts. It’s that simple.

SENATE GOP CAREFULLY WEIGHING CONTROVERSIAL TAX PROVISIONS BEFORE BRINGING BIG, BEAUTIFUL BILL TO THE FLOOR 

Speaker of the House Mike Johnson, left, and U.S. Capitol Building, right (Getty)

Earlier in the day on Thursday, it was unclear whether congressional Republicans had the votes to approve the spending cancellation package. It’s known as a “rescissions” bill because it “rescinds” money already approved by Congress. But the stakes for this bill were hard to understate for the GOP. Republicans crow a lot about cutting spending and reducing the deficit. But unless you can actually pass a bill to cut spending, talk is cheap.

Advertisement

And government programs are expensive.

All of official Washington would have trained its attention on the House floor late Thursday afternoon to see how Republicans fared with the spending cancellation request. But the shocking video of the feds tangling with Sen. Alex Padilla, D-Calif., and handcuffing him quickly consumed every cubic centimeter of news oxygen.

Sen. Alex Padilla speaks during a press conference at the Federal Building on Wilshire Blvd Thursday, Jun. 12, 2025, in Los Angeles. (Luke Johnson / Los Angeles Times via Getty Images)

The Congressional Hispanic Caucus and California Democrats planned to march to the office of Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D. A cavalcade of angry Democratic senators seized the Senate floor, excoriating the Trump Administration’s tactics and demanding action from Thune and House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La. A wild scene erupted in the House Oversight Committee. Rep. Maxwell Frost, D-Fla., demanded that Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer, R-Ky., commit to subpoenaing Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem after the Padilla fracas.

“Will you just shut up!” implored Comer of Frost. “Just shut up! Shut up!”

Advertisement

“You’re not going to tell me to shut up!” bellowed Frost.

“He’s been arrested as a former Antifa member,” piled on Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga.

You see why it was hard for the press corps to concentrate on the rescissions vote.

But back to the House floor.

The bill was heading to defeat midway through the roll call. Six Republicans posted nay votes on the board.

Advertisement

House of Representatives (Chip Somodevilla)

Rep. Nicole Malliotakis, R-N.Y. was among them. She told reporters her constituents supported public broadcasting. And she didn’t like the mechanics of the administration sending a request to Congress to rub out spending.

“I think this does give too much discretion to the White House to make cuts when we are the House that has the power of the purse,” said Malliotakis. “And I’ve seen some of the cuts, as I’ve said in the past, the World Trade Center Health program, the Women’s Health program. These are things that we had to go fight and get restored.”

But there were huddles on the floor during the vote itself. Rep. Nick LaLota, R-N.Y., chatted with Johnson and House Majority Whip Tom Emmer, R-Minn. A few moments later, LaLota and Rep. Don Bacon, R-Neb., who was a no, switched their ballots to yes.

Rep. Tom Emmer speaks during the Republican National Convention Tuesday, Jul. 16, 2024, in Milwaukee.  (AP Photo/Charles Rex Arbogast)

Advertisement

Republicans gaveled the vote closed at 214-212.

“I ultimately voted yes after a conversation or two with the Speaker and the Whip raised my confidence level,” said LaLota. “I trust those two individuals. We’ve dealt with each other for the last couple of years. We’ve gotten on the same page.”

Bacon had spoken glowingly in recent days about his relationship with public broadcasters in Nebraska. He also had reservations about cutting PEPFAR, the global AIDS mitigation effort. But now Bacon didn’t fry his party.

“I was assured that PBS would receive funding in this year’s budget. And I discussed PEPFAR with the speaker,” said the Nebraska Republican.

A few moments later, Johnson was outside the House chamber, bragging about his colleagues for passing the bill.

Advertisement

“We are fulfilling the promises we made to the American people,” said Johnson. “Today’s passage of this initial rescissions package marks a critical step towards a more responsible and transparent government that puts the interests of the American taxpayers first.”

Failing to pass this teardrop of spending reductions amid a deep federal sea would have been catastrophic for the GOP. Again, especially because of all the braggadocio about cutting spending. Now Republicans can focus on bigger and more controversial spending cut requests from the Trump administration.

But few reporters cared much about what Johnson had to say at that moment because of the immediate mania involving Padilla. The Capitol descended into chaos. The outcome of the critical vote was relegated to a footnote on a wild news day. By nightfall, no one was talking about the rescissions package at all. Let alone Padilla.

Despite the staggering news traffic, the vote notched yet another narrow victory for Johnson and House Republicans. Like it or not, Johnson has piloted the fractious House Republican Conference to a series of slim victories on tough bills all year long.

In February, the House narrowly approved its initial framework for the Big, Beautiful Bill. The outline was essential to help ease eventual passage in the Senate. At one point, it looked like Republicans lacked the votes. In fact, House leaders began sending Members home for the night. Then, they suddenly reversed themselves. Johnson and the GOP eked out a 217-215 victory, approving the framework and sending it to the Senate.

Advertisement

Switch one vote, and the gig was up. The House and Senate would not be on the same page with a budget framework for the touchstone of President Trump’s agenda. That would neutralize the entire exercise.

A few weeks later, the House approved an interim spending bill to avoid a government shutdown, 217-213. Again a narrow vote. Only Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., voted nay. Flip two votes and the tally is 215-215. Again, a tie vote kills the bill.

Rep. Thomas Massie attends the inauguration of U.S. President-elect Donald Trump in the Rotunda of the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 20, 2025, in Washington. (Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images)

The Senate okayed one framework for the Big, Beautiful Bill in February. Another one in the spring. But the House and Senate still weren’t on the same page. In mid-April, the House and Senate finally aligned. The House adopted the Senate’s final blueprint for the Big, Beautiful Bill, 216-214. Massie and Rep. Victoria Spartz, R-Ind., voted nay. Again, change one vote and it’s a tie. Defeat would have stalled the process for the Big, Beautiful Bill.

Finally, Johnson and the GOP scored perhaps their biggest win of the year in mid-May. The House voted 215-214 with one member voting “present” to pass the initial version of the Big, Beautiful Bill and send it to the Senate. Rep. Andrew Garbarino, R-N.Y., had problems with the bill. But missed the vote because he fell asleep as the House debated the measure in the middle of the night. House Freedom Caucus Chairman and Rep. Andy Harris, R-Md., also had reservations. But he cast the “present” vote. Either of these members could have tanked the legislation had they voted nay.

Advertisement

Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., was the master at lugging challenging votes across the finish line by a vote or two. She’s the reason Obamacare passed. But Pelosi often had larger majorities. Her secret sauce was understanding what members needed to vote yes on controversial legislation.

Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, a Democrat from California, speaks during a news conference at the U.S. Capitol in Washington on Thursday, Nov. 4, 2021. (Craig Hudson/Bloomberg via Getty Images)

The speaker has Trump on his side and a GOP conference that is willing to do practically whatever he wants. That helps a lot. But Johnson’s resume of pushing through tough bills by the tiniest of margins is beginning to mirror Pelosi’s success. However, the level of difficulty is higher for Johnson thanks to the minuscule majority.

Pelosi was a parliamentary maestro when she was Speaker. And so far during his speakership, Johnson has defied political gravity. But whether you like Johnson’s politics or not, keen political observers are noticing that he has a knack for pulling off the seemingly unachievable. That was long the calling card of Pelosi.

Advertisement

And it may eventually prove to be the calling card of Johnson, too.

Politics

Black mold and $1 wages: Settlement forces immigrant detention centers to protect workers

Published

on

Black mold and  wages: Settlement forces immigrant detention centers to protect workers

In 2023, California regulators levied more than $100,000 in fines against the private operator of a federal immigration facility, kicking off a three-year battle over whether detainees who do work at the facilities should be considered employees.

The question went beyond semantics: If considered employees, the detainees would be subject to state worker protection laws.

A legal settlement announced this week now affirms that private immigrant detention facilities are subject to California’s workplace safety and health requirements.

“Every worker deserves a safe and healthy workplace and should be able to report workplace hazards without fear of retaliation,” said Denisse Gómez, spokesperson for the California Division of Occupational Safety and Health or Cal/OSHA.

Advertisement

“Individuals who perform work in these facilities are entitled to workplace safety protections, and this settlement reinforces Cal/OSHA’s commitment to enforcing those protections and safeguarding vulnerable workers,” she added.

Under the settlement between California and the GEO Group, a Florida-based private prison company, the company recently withdrew its legal challenges and agreed to pay more than $100,000 in the fines.

The GEO Group did not respond to requests for comment.

Back in 2023, Cal/OSHA issued $104,510 in fines against the GEO Group. The agency had found six violations of state code by the company after detainees complained about a lack of protective equipment and proper training while cleaning the facility for $1 per day.

Detainees alleged they routinely wiped black mold off shower walls at the facility, saw black dust spew from air vents and used cleaning solutions that lacked instructions during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Advertisement

The biggest fine levied against the GEO Group was for failure to establish and maintain “effective written procedures to reduce employee risk of exposure to aerosol transmissible disease.”

Advocates viewed Cal/OSHA’S recognition of the detainees as workers as a victory that could pave the way for future labor rights fights at other detention centers in the state.

But the GEO Group appealed, arguing that detainees participating in ICE’s voluntary work program make their own schedules and aren’t employees, so hazard exposure couldn’t be “as a result of assigned duties,” as California law states. Plus, the company argued, there wasn’t enough evidence that detainees were exposed to any hazard.

Early last year, the state’s Occupational Safety and Health Appeals Board rejected the GEO Group’s argument and found that detainees should be considered “affected employees.”

The GEO Group sued, but three days before a California Superior Court hearing in May, the company and Cal/OSHA reached the settlement.

Advertisement

Along with paying the fines, the GEO Group agreed to draft plans for avoiding aerosol transmissions at 12 secure and reentry facilities in California, including five detention centers that hold immigrants.

“GEO ensures detainees are afforded the necessary tools, equipment, and personal protective equipment … to safely and effectively perform any necessary tasks,” the settlement states.

Gómez said the settlement also leaves intact the appeals board’s ruling that civil immigration detainees who participate in work programs can participate in proceedings anonymously, “acknowledging the potential for retaliation when individuals raise workplace safety concerns.”

But the question of whether detainees are employees and deserve certain protections isn’t entirely resolved — at least not for the federal government.

Last month, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement released new standards for detention facilities across the country. The revised guidelines “emphasize that detainee volunteers participating in the voluntary work program are not considered facility and/or government employees” and thus not entitled to labor regulations.

Advertisement

Attorney Mariel Villarreal said the timing of the new detention standards made her question whether the GEO Group had asked ICE to specify in its standards that detainees are not workers in response to its battle with Cal/OSHA.

“To me, it’s a reaction to this very settlement,” she said. Villarreal works for the California Collaborative for Immigrant Justice, which filed the original complaint on behalf of detainees who said they worked in unsafe conditions.

Villarreal pointed to a Washington Post report that GEO Group executives privately asked ICE to specify that detainees are not employees of the facilities where they work. Two top Trump administration officials, border czar Tom Homan and acting ICE director David Venturella, previously worked for the GEO Group.

New versions of ICE detention standards take effect as contracts are established or modified, so this year’s rules won’t immediately apply to every facility.

An ICE spokesperson did not comment about the settlement. The spokesperson, who did not provide their name in an emailed statement Wednesday, said the agency has begun transitioning detention facilities to meet the 2026 standards, “building on its longstanding commitment to safe, secure, and professional detention operations.”

Advertisement

“ICE has consistently implemented many of these best practices independently, reinforcing its role as the leader in detention operations,” the spokesperson added.

The GEO Group and other immigrant detention center operators have faced other legal battles over workers’ rights, including lawsuits in Washington, Colorado and California over the $1-per-day payment.

Villarreal said she’s confident that the Cal/OSHA settlement would continue to hold even if California facilities incorporated the new standards. But she said she believes the statements are an attempt by the GEO Group to “sidestep responsibility” and avoid the possibility of being fined under similar circumstances in other states.

“These statements in the new standards are a way for them to try and preserve profits as much as possible,” she said. “GEO and ICE are so intertwined at this point that they have the same motives.”

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

Israel shares intelligence warning Iran plotted new assassination attempt against Trump: report

Published

on

Israel shares intelligence warning Iran plotted new assassination attempt against Trump: report

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

Israel recently shared intelligence with the United States indicating Iran had developed a fresh plan to assassinate President Donald Trump, according to a Wall Street Journal report Thursday citing people familiar with the matter.

The reported intelligence would mark an escalation in the longstanding threats against Trump, who Iran has repeatedly vowed to retaliate against over the 2020 U.S. strike that killed Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps Gen. Qassem Soleimani. 

The White House referred Fox News Digital to Trump’s remarks Wednesday when asked about the report.

TRUMP FACES UNPRECEDENTED THIRD ASSASSINATION ATTEMPT

Advertisement

President Donald Trump speaks during a news conference at the NATO Summit in Ankara, Turkey, July 8, 2026. Trump addressed threats against his life after a report said Israel shared intelligence with the United States about an alleged new Iranian assassination plot. (Kerem Uzel/Bloomberg via Getty Images)

“They want to take out the U.S. leader — me. I’m on whatever list. I saw this morning I’m on every single one of their lists,” Trump said. “And, so far, I guess I’ve been a bit lucky, but maybe that doesn’t last very long. These are evil, sick people. And we have to root out that cancer. That cancer. You know what you do? You’ve got to cut out cancer early. And that’s the way I feel.”

Fox News Digital has also reached out to Israel’s Embassy in Washington and Iran’s Mission to the United Nations for comment.

The Journal reported the intelligence surfaced as Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu have diverged in recent weeks over how to proceed after last month’s conflict with Iran. Netanyahu has advocated for continuing military pressure on Tehran, while Trump has sought to preserve a fragile ceasefire after U.S. strikes on Iranian nuclear sites.

NETANYAHU REJECTS REPORTS OF A RIFT WITH PRESIDENT TRUMP, SAYS THE TWO REMAIN ALIGNED ON IRAN

Advertisement

President Donald Trump, left, and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu at the White House March 25, 2019. The leaders spoke Thursday after The Wall Street Journal reported Israel had shared intelligence with the United States about an alleged new Iranian plot targeting Trump. (AP Photo/Susan Walsh, File)

Trump and Netanyahu spoke Thursday and agreed to continue coordination between the two countries, according to a statement from Netanyahu’s office, which said Trump also updated the Israeli leader on recent U.S. activity in the Gulf.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu during his conversation with U.S. President Donald Trump. (Avi Ohayon/GPO)

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Iranian mourners at the funeral for Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei chanted for Trump’s death and displayed a banner that said, “We Will Kill Trump,” according to the Journal.

Advertisement

Iran has publicly vowed for years to retaliate against Trump over the U.S. operation that killed Soleimani, the former commander of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps’ Quds Force, in Baghdad in January 2020.

Continue Reading

Politics

Iran ceasefire is ‘over,’ Trump says, and orders additional strikes

Published

on

Iran ceasefire is ‘over,’ Trump says, and orders additional strikes

A tentative armistice between the United States and Iran reached less than a month ago appeared all but dead Wednesday after the two sides traded fresh military strikes, and as President Trump directed further attacks on the Islamic Republic.

The escalation marked a dramatic turn after the Trump administration spent weeks selling a diplomatic breakthrough with Tehran that proved controversial across the political aisle, lifting oil sanctions and a naval blockade on Iran in exchange for the promise of talks over the status of the Strait of Hormuz and its decades-old nuclear program.

Now, speaking to reporters at the NATO summit in Turkey, Trump said he believed the truce — which diplomats describe as a memorandum of understanding — was “over” and that it was a “waste of time” dealing with Iranian leadership.

“They’re scum. They’re sick people,” Trump said of Iranian leaders, whom he had characterized last month as “very rational people” and “very nice to deal with.”

The president’s dim views of the ceasefire agreement’s fate were shared by Iran’s foreign ministry, which issued a statement on Wednesday saying the American attacks, the reinstatement of a U.S. naval blockade on the Strait of Hormuz, and Israel’s continuing attacks in Lebanon rendered “important and fundamental” parts of the deal “ineffective.”

Advertisement

The truce’s unraveling was underscored by Trump ordering the U.S. military to launch a series of strikes against Iran on Wednesday afternoon to “further degrade their ability to threaten” the commercial shipping through the Strait of Hormuz.

“The United States is holding Iran accountable for recent unjustified aggression against commercial shipping and civilian crews freely navigating a vital international waterway,” U.S. Central Command said in a statement on social media.

Earlier in the day, Trump signaled that the United States planned to “hit them hard” and floated the possibility of taking over Kharg Island, which is vital to Iran’s economy. His remarks quickly prompted oil prices to rise and global stock markets to fall, a worry that Trump acknowledged but which did not seem to sway his decision-making in relation to Iran.

“If we hit Iran, oil goes up a little bit, it is all right,” Trump said. He later added that the United States may “do some other thing that could lift it a little bit, but I don’t think it’s gonna lift it a lot at all.”

As Trump signals the continuation of fighting, his administration has been seeking more than $67 billion in funding to cover expenses related to the Iran war, a request that Congress has not yet approved as lawmakers have been split over the president’s handling of the conflict.

Advertisement

“The American people are paying the price for Trump’s total failure in Iran,” Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) said in a statement Wednesday. “Our troops are back in harm’s way and high gas costs are continuing to punish working families.”

The president’s stance on the war marked the latest setback to a fragile truce that has barely held since the 14-page agreement was signed June 17, as the U.S. and Iran engaged over the last few weeks in cycles of attacks and counterattacks.

Trump was noticeably angrier at Iran on Wednesday as he cast doubt over the deal. Last month, Trump had complimented Iranian leadership for trying to reach a peace deal and celebrated the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz, a crucial shipping route for the world’s oil and gas. But based on his remarks, it was clear he was out of patience.

“I am not happy with them,” Trump said. “They’re cuckoo. There’s something wrong with these people. For 47 years, they’ve been the bully of the Middle East and they are not the bully anymore. They are not the bully anymore.”

Trump expressed frustration with Iran’s negotiators and their resistance to abiding by U.S. demands to reopen the strait. When asked if he intended to send troops to Iran, the president dismissed the idea.

Advertisement

“Why would I go in now?” Trump said. “I’d go in when they’re completely eliminated or an agreement is made.”

Still, the president kept the door open for negotiations, saying that his envoys Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner “want to negotiate.”

“They’re good people, Steve Witkoff, Jared Kushner, but they have to come back to me,” Trump said. “As far as I’m concerned, it’s just a waste of time dealing with [the Iranians]. They’re liars.”

The latest breakdown to the ceasefire followed a now-familiar chain reaction of tit-for-tat attacks, starting with a series of strikes on three oil tankers transiting the Strait of Hormuz on Tuesday, including a Qatari vessel carrying natural gas, according to the United Kingdom Maritime Trade Operations center.

The Qatari tanker was off the coast of Oman when it was hit and caught fire, the maritime monitor said, in what experts say was a move to thwart ships attempting to use an alternate transit route to the one Iran specified. Iran did not claim responsibility, but a report on Iranian state television said the Qatari tanker came under attack after ignoring warnings to turn back.

Advertisement

The two other vessels were damaged but were able to continue to their destination, according to the U.K. group.

Qatar, which has played a vital role in facilitating negotiations between the U.S. and Iran, condemned the attack on its tanker as “unacceptable.”

The U.S. responded with a wave of strikes against more than 80 Iranian targets aimed at “impos[ing] heavy costs for targeting and attacking commercial shipping crewed by innocent civilians in an international waterway,” according to a statement from U.S. Central Command. That tally included roughly 60 Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps small boats in the strait.

Iranian state media said U.S. strikes targeted Sirik, Qeshm Island and Bushehr and Bandar Abbas, while a U.S. drone strike on the port city of Mahshahr killed one Revolutionary Guard member.

Ahead of the strikes, the White House revoked the 60-day temporary license given to Tehran to sell and deliver oil during the truce.

Advertisement

Iran’s military countered with its own strikes on 85 U.S. military facilities in Bahrain and Kuwait; it also shot down an MQ-9 drone, according to a statement on Wednesday.

Kuwait said its military intercepted two ballistic missiles and 13 drones, but that none had resulted in material damage or casualties.

Global oil prices surged 6% on news of Trump’s reversal on the deal, rising to more than $78 a barrel, down from the peak during the war but still above prewar levels.

The renewed violence appeared to have little effect on the funeral for Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who was killed in an Israeli strike on Feb. 28, in the war’s opening hours.

The funeral, a days-long period of mourning, is set to end on Thursday, when Khamenei’s body will return from Iraq to be buried in the city of Mashhad, his birthplace. Negotiations were to begin once more.

Advertisement

In his remarks Wednesday, Trump said Iranian leaders had asked for a “timeout” to attend the funeral, and that he had promised not to kill them.

“And I said give it to them, and they start shooting missiles,” Trump said.

Whether those talks — which were meant to deal with the thorniest issues between the two countries, including the Strait of Hormuz and Iran’s nuclear program — will go ahead remains unclear. Iran, for its part, maintained a defiant attitude.

“The era of bullying and extortion is over,” wrote Mohammad Ghalibaf, Iran’s parliamentary speaker. “It leads nowhere. We don’t fold.”

Ali Akbar Velayati, a senior advisor to the supreme leader, posted on X that Trump’s policy had “driven the region towards fire.”

Advertisement

“We had previously warned that the region is not a place for the political gambling of small countries, and we have repeatedly proven that adventures are met with an immediate response,” he wrote.

He added that the Axis of Resistance — a reference to Iran’s network of allied groups in Lebanon, Iraq and Yemen — would not be “silent against humiliation and adventurism” and has “its finger on the trigger.”

Bulos reported from Beirut and Ceballos from Washington.

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending