Devon Archer debate focuses on Hunter Biden ‘illusion of access’

Posted on July 31, 2023 (Updated August 1, 2023) by Emily Brooks

Democrats and Republicans are offering clashing interpretations of the significance of former Hunter Biden business associate Devon Archer’s closed-door testimony, which lawmakers said included assertions that Hunter Biden was selling the “illusion of access” to his father and that Hunter Biden sometimes put President Biden on speakerphone to talk to his business associates.

The revelations are fueling Republican attempts to link the president to his son’s business dealings. Republicans, including Speaker Kevin McCarthy (Calif.) and House Oversight Committee Chairman Rep. James Comer (Ky.), say the testimony shows that President Biden “lied” when he made campaign trail statements that he had never talked to his son about his foreign business dealings.

But Democrats say Archer’s testimony to the House Oversight Committee on Monday actually shows the president was not involved in Hunter Biden’s foreign business affairs.

Rep. Dan Goldman (D-N.Y.), who attended the hours-long transcribed interview, said Archer testified that because Hunter Biden was under pressure from Ukrainian energy company Burisma, “he had to give the illusion — and he used that term, the illusion — of access to his father, and he tried to get credit for things that he — that Mr. Archer testified Hunter had nothing to do with, such as when Vice President Biden went to Ukraine on his own.”

Lawmakers clash over whether testimony implicates president

Archer was on the board of Burisma with Hunter Biden. Republicans have said then-Vice President Biden’s call to remove Ukrainian prosecutor Viktor Shokin, whose office was investigating Burisma, was directly related to his son’s involvement with, and sizable payments from, the company.

But the investigation in Burisma had been opened before Shokin took the position, and Shokin was widely criticized for failure to prosecute corruption, with his ouster supported by numerous U.S. officials.

Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), the ranking member on the House Oversight Committee, said in a statement that Archer testified that “President Biden was not involved in his son’s business affairs, and that President Biden was never asked to, nor did he, take any official actions in relation to those business matters.”

White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said last week that the president “was never in business with his son.”

On the other end of the partisan spectrum, Rep. Andy Biggs (R-Ariz.), who also attended the transcribed interview, said he thought Archer’s testimony “implicate[s] the president.”

Reading from his notes of the transcribed interview, Biggs said Archer testified that “Burisma would have gone out of business sooner if the Biden brand had not been invoked. People would be intimidated to legally mess with Burisma because of the Biden family brand.”

According to Biggs, Archer said the Biden “brand” referred to President Biden. But Goldman later said that Archer clarified the “brand” was based on a “D.C. brand based on his own experience in lobbying” and “in conjunction with the fact that his last name was Biden.”

Burisma bribery allegations

Both Biggs and Goldman said that Archer had no knowledge of an alleged $5 million payment to Biden from Burisma, an allegation relayed by a confidential FBI source in a form released by Republicans earlier in June.

Goldman argued that Archer’s testimony undercut the premise of the Biden-Burisma bribery allegations.

“Even though it was perceived by Burisma that they had the Prosecutor General Shokin ‘under control,’ quote unquote, that Joe Biden advocated for his firing — which of course, was not coveted or desired by Burisma, and would potentially be bad for Burisma,” Goldman said.

Raskin said that Republicans appeared to be “chasing” the bribery allegations, and pointed to a recent letter to Comer from Lev Parnas, who was involved in an effort to dig up dirt about the Bidens in Ukraine ahead of the 2020 election, urging Comer to abandon efforts to chase the “conspiracy theories.”

Comer, on the other hand, took issue with Hunter Biden’s work with Burisma.

“When Burisma’s owner was facing pressure from the Ukrainian prosecutor investigating the company for corruption, Archer testified that Burisma executives asked Hunter to ‘call D.C.’ after a Burisma board meeting in Dubai,” he said in a statement, which a press release said raised concerns that Hunter Biden was in violation of the Foreign Agents Registration Act.

Phone calls with the president

Archer’s testimony did appear to partially back up Comer’s statement to the New York Post last week that he expected Archer to discuss the times he witnessed Hunter Biden’s putting then-Vice President Biden on speakerphone with foreign business partners.

Democrats downplayed that concern.

“The witness indicated that Hunter spoke to his father every day, and approximately 20 times over the course of a 10-year relationship. Hunter may have put his father on the phone with any number of different people, and they never once spoke about any business dealings,” Goldman said.

“As he described it, it was all casual conversation, niceties, the weather, ‘What’s going on?’” Goldman said, adding that “there wasn't a single conversation about any of the business dealings that Hunter had.”

Democrats also stressed that there were especially frequent conversations between Hunter Biden and his father after his brother, Beau Biden, died from brain cancer in 2015.

Biggs pushed back on Goldman’s characterization.

“He probably forgot to tell you that Devon Archer himself said that was an implication of who the ‘big guy’ is,” Biggs said, referring to communications drawn from a laptop hard drive that purportedly belonged to Hunter Biden.

The House Oversight GOP also said in a tweet that President Biden attended a 2014 dinner with Hunter Biden and some of his foreign business associates at Cafe Milano in Washington, D.C.

White House slams GOP after ‘much-hyped witness’ testimony

Ian Sams, White House spokesperson for oversight and investigations, also argued that the Archer interview poked holes in the GOP attempts to directly link President Biden to his family’s foreign business dealings.

“It appears that the House Republicans’ own much-hyped witness today testified that he never heard of President Biden discussing business with his son or his son’s associates, or doing anything wrong,” Sams said. “House Republicans keep promising bombshell evidence to support their ridiculous attacks against the President, but time after time, they keep failing to produce any. In fact, even their own witnesses appear to be debunking their allegations.”

Raskin said that the Biden family investigation is a “desperate effort to distract everyone from former President Donald Trump’s mounting criminal indictments and deepening legal morass.”

Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), who was also in the interview, told reporters that Archer had revealed new information, but declined to elaborate further.

Abbe Lowell, counsel for Hunter Biden, said in a statement that House Republicans "keep swinging and keep striking out in their obsessive pursuit of the President through his son, Hunter."

"Mr. Archer confirmed one more time that Hunter Biden did not involve his father in, nor did his father assist him in, his business. It’s well known that Hunter and his father speak daily, and what Mr. Archer confirmed today was that when those calls occurred during Hunter’s business meetings, if there was any interaction between his father and his business associates, it was simply to exchange small talk," Lowell said.

"Like the relatives of Donald Trump, Senators Ron Johnson and Ted Cruz, Rep. Lauren Boebert, and many others, family members of elected representatives meet people and may get opportunities because of those connections," he continued. "Congress would be busy investigating many of their own if that’s their idea of an offense.”

Archer did not answer shouted questions when entering or leaving the transcribed interview, and his attorney declined to take a side in the debate over his testimony.

“We are aware that all sides are claiming victory following Mr. Archer’s voluntary interview today. But all Devon Archer did was exactly what we said he would: show up and answer the questions put to him honestly and completely. Mr. Archer shared the truth with the Committee, and we will leave to them and others to decide what to do with it,” said Matthew L. Schwartz, a managing partner of Boies Schiller Flexner LLP.

Democrat downplays Hunter Biden associate Devon Archer’s testimony

Posted on July 31, 2023 (Updated July 31, 2023) by Emily Brooks

Former Hunter Biden business associate Devon Archer said during closed-door testimony that Hunter included President Biden on a number of phone calls that presumably included business associates, according to one lawmaker’s account of the testimony, a revelation that is likely to fuel Republican attempts to link the president to his son’s business dealings.

But the Democratic lawmaker said that Archer’s testimony to the House Oversight and Accountability Committee did not show that the president was involved in Hunter Biden’s business dealings.

“The witness indicated that Hunter spoke to his father every day, and approximately 20 times over the course of 10 year relationship, Hunter may have put his father on the phone with any number of different people, and they never once spoke about any business dealings,” Rep. Dan Goldman (D-N.Y.) said.

“As he described it, it was all casual conversation, niceties, the weather, ‘What’s going on?’” Goldman said, adding that, “There wasn't a single conversation about any of the business dealings that Hunter had.”

Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), who was also in the interview, told reporters that Archer had revealed new information but declined to elaborate further.

The readout of the testimony appears to partially back up House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer’s (R-Ky.) statement to the New York Post last week that he expected Archer to discuss the times he “has witnessed Joe Biden meeting with Hunter Biden’s overseas business partners when he was vice president, including on speakerphone.”

Asked last week about allegations that the president had communicated directly with his son’s foreign business associates, White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said that the president “was never in business with his son.”

The interview follows a letter from the Department of Justice over the weekend, regarding Archer’s sentencing for an unrelated matter, that is adding to GOP claims of government obstruction of their investigation into the Biden family’s business dealings — even as Archer’s attorney beat down the speculation.

The Justice Department (DOJ) in its letter requested that a judge set a date for Archer to start his one-year prison sentence for his conviction for defrauding a Native American tribe, despite Archer’s counsel saying it was “premature” to do so because of an anticipated appeal and an “error” in sentencing.

That set off alarm bells in the GOP.

"I don't know if this a coincidence, or if this is another example of the weaponization of the Department of Justice,” Comer said Sunday on Fox News.

Other Republicans went further, accusing the DOJ of explicit interference in the GOP-led investigation. Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.) said lawmakers should return from an August recess for emergency hearings if Archer did not show up.

But Archer’s attorney stressed the letter would not impact his planned interview, which had been rescheduled multiple times since Comer subpoenaed him in June.

“We are aware of speculation that the Department of Justice’s weekend request to have Mr. Archer report to prison is an attempt by the Biden administration to intimidate him in advance of his meeting with the House Oversight Committee on Monday,” Archer’s lawyer Matthew Schwartz said in a Sunday statement, first provided to Politico. “To be clear, Mr. Archer does not agree with that speculation. In any case, Mr. Archer will do what he has planned to do all along, which is to show up on Monday and to honestly answer the questions that are put to him by the Congressional investigators.”

The DOJ said in a subsequent letter that it was not requesting that Archer surrender before his expected congressional testimony.

His appearance went on as scheduled. A smiling Archer did not answer shouted questions as he arrived at the interview with his lawyer Monday morning.

The interview will consist of four hours of questioning divided evenly between Republicans and Democrats and is expected to end mid-afternoon. In addition to Jordan and Goldman, Rep. Andy Biggs (R-Ariz.) attended the Archer interview.

“I believe he can tell us things we haven’t heard before,” Biggs said.

Goldman cast doubt on the GOP attempts to link the president to his son’s business dealings.

“We're all waiting for any pin, whether it be a linchpin or other pin, to figure out how this is connected at all to President Biden,” Goldman said.

Updated at 2:02 p.m.

Lawmakers set to face ticking clock on health care priorities

Posted on July 31, 2023 (Updated July 31, 2023) by Nathaniel Weixel

The House and Senate left Washington for the month of August with a lengthy, time-sensitive to-do list waiting when they return, including multiple key health care priorities.

There will only be three weeks before the end of the fiscal year to get everything done, and just 11 legislative days when both chambers will be in session at the same time.

Congress faces a Sept. 30 deadline to reauthorize a sweeping pandemic preparedness bill, fund community health centers and renew opioid addiction services.

But the largest looming deadline is the appropriations bills to fund the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), which are tied up in the House amid disagreements over abortion policies and spending levels.

GOP leaders scuttled a vote planned for Friday on legislation funding the FDA and the Department of Agriculture after moderate Republicans objected to a provision that would reverse the FDA’s decision to allow the abortion pill mifepristone drug to be dispensed through the mail and in retail pharmacies.

House Freedom Caucus members have also been demanding even deeper spending cuts than agreed to in the bipartistan debt ceiling deal.

The Labor-HHS bill advanced through a House Appropriations subcommittee earlier this month, but hadn't even made it to the full committee before recess. The Republican-led House bill would slash or eliminate funding from a range of programs that deal with everything from family planning to teen pregnancy and even HIV.

Both FDA and HHS funding bills face a major fight in the Democratic-controlled Senate, where the Appropriations Committee has already passed its own version by near unanimous margins, owing to an agreement by Democratic and Republican leaders not to insert “poison pill” amendments.

House Democratic Whip Katherine Clark (Mass.) argued in a floor speech that lawmakers should stay in Washington to strip out the “toxic, divisive, bigoted riders” in the bills, and ripped Republicans for delaying votes until September.

Pandemic preparedness

The House and Senate are taking different tracks in the reauthorization of the pandemic preparedness bill, complicating its path forward.

The Senate advanced a bipartisan version of the Pandemic All-Hazards Preparedness Act out of committee, but the House is divided. House Energy and Commerce Committee Republicans advanced a bill on party lines after Democrats introduced their own version.

The primary disagreement is over drug shortages. Democrats are clamoring to give FDA more oversight authority to address the shortages, but Republicans are insisting on keeping the issues separate.

The Senate version contains some provisions addressing drug shortages, but only one involves beefing up FDA authority.

Congress is under pressure to stem drug shortages amid reports of doctors rationing cancer drugs and other medicine. Republicans on the Energy and Commerce Committee have said they are committed to dealing with the problems, but that it shouldn't be part of the preparedness bill.

Energy and Commerce Committee GOP leaders released a discussion draft Friday of drug shortage legislation focusing on the economic reasons for shortages, including giving some generic drug manufacturers the ability to raise the cost of their drugs if hospitals keep prices "artificially low" to the point where there's no economic incentive to produce or sell them.

Health centers

Legislation to reauthorize funding for community health centers also faces partisan challenges. But in this case, the House cleared its bill on a bipartisan basis, while the Senate is still working through disagreements, highlighting the work to be done.

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), chairman of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) Committee, originally wanted tens of billions of dollars more for the centers. He was asking for $130 billion to fund the centers over the next five years as well as $60 billion to help grow the health care workforce.

But Sanders ended up canceling a planned markup during the last week of July. Raising some eyebrows, Sanders said he is working with Sen. Roger Marshall (R-Kan.) to craft a bipartisan bill that will be "ready by the first week of September."

Separately, Sanders and Senate Finance Committee Chairman Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) issued a joint statement pledging to partner and work toward legislation in the fall aimed at addressing primary care and other health care workforce shortages.

Opioids

At issue are several provisions of sweeping legislation signed into law in 2018 called the Support Act, which aimed to tackle the country's drug overdose epidemic.

The House Energy and Commerce Committee advanced a bipartisan reauthorization and expansion bill, but advocates are concerned the Senate is behind.

HELP Committee ranking member Bill Cassidy (R-La.) introduced his own version of the bill July 20, but hearings won't be scheduled until September. Cassidy has warned that the committee is wasting time on partisan bills instead of easy bipartisan wins, such as the Support Act.

Insulin/PBM reform

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) has said for months that he wants to move legislation that would cap the cost of insulin at $35 per month for people with private insurance.

There's hope to combine it with legislation reforming the pharmacy benefit manager (PBM) industry into a package that could get bipartisan support.

But there's no looming deadline and no guarantee it will get taken up in September.

Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), who is a co-sponsor of one of the insulin bills with Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine), said she still has Schumer's support heading into the fall but has not heard anything about timing.

Multiple committees have advanced PBM reform bills in both the House and Senate, so they will all need to be combined into one floor-friendly package.

Democratic Caucus chair says shutdown is looming because ‘the far right is battling the extreme right’

Posted on July 31, 2023 (Updated July 31, 2023) by Joe Jacquez

Democratic Caucus Chairman Rep. Pete Aguilar (D-Calif.) said Congress is on a "collision course" toward a government shutdown because of the power dynamics at play in the House of Representatives.

Aguilar attempted to characterize two factions of the House GOP conference, the "far right" and the "extreme right," and blamed the internal battle taking place between the two groups for what he sees as the House's inability to do their job.

"This is what House Republicans have done; they have created a scenario where the most extreme MAGA Republicans guide everything we do.

"Kevin McCarthy can't pass appropriations bills; he can't pass pieces of legislation without this core group of supporters, and so he has to do anything they want, including and up to impeachment," Aguilar said Sunday in an interview with MSNBC's Jen Psaki.

Nancy Mace says Biden impeachment talk puts House GOP majority at risk

Posted on July 30, 2023 (Updated July 30, 2023) by Sarah Fortinsky

Rep. Nancy Mace (R-S.C.) said Sunday that discussion of impeaching President Biden puts Republicans’ majority in the House at risk in 2024 — by jeopardizing members who represent districts that President Biden won in 2020.

Mace’s concerns come as Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) raised the possibility of opening an impeachment inquiry into President Biden, as House Republicans ramp up their efforts to investigate the Biden family.

The rhetoric has come under scrutiny from some in the party, who view McCarthy’s recent efforts as an attempt to placate the conservative wing as he struggles to get consensus in his party on spending levels.

“Well, I do believe we are, at this point, an inquiry is different from an impeachment vote and is another tool in the toolbox,” Mace said in an interview on "Fox News Sunday" with Shannon Bream, echoing the sentiment of McCarthy, who has tried to draw a clear distinction between “impeachment” and an “impeachment inquiry.”

“I will tell you, every time we walk the plank, we are putting moderate members, members [in Biden-won districts]. We are putting those seats at risk for 2024. We are putting the majority at risk. And it's not just impeachment that does that. Other issues, like abortion, et cetera, also put those members on the plank,” Mace continued.

Mace said it was still important to proceed with investigations of the Bidens, and that "whatever the evidence shows us, we ought to follow the facts, and we have to be better than [former Speaker] Nancy Pelosi. Pelosi really politicized the impeachment process.”

Pelosi served as Speaker of the House during the two impeachment trials of former President Trump.

Mace continued: “We do not want to do that here. We have to show overwhelming, undeniable evidence in order to move this thing forward. And if we can't, then we should not. But if we do, then we ought to use every tool in the toolbox to make sure the American people see it for what it is, and we can hold everyone accountable.”

Schiff says McCarthy floating Biden impeachment to deal with ‘craziest’ Republicans in conference

Posted on July 30, 2023 (Updated July 30, 2023) by Lauren Sforza

Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) said Sunday that House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) is floating an impeachment inquiry into President Biden to deal with the "craziest" Republicans in his conference.

"But what concerns me is, I think McCarthy may open an impeachment inquiry because he thinks it will lead off the steam with the craziest in this conference," Schiff said on "Inside with Jen Psaki." "But by doing it he is going to set a train in motion that he may not be able to stop. And, of course, McCarthy isn't thinking ahead. He's thinking, how I keep my speakership for another day, maybe another week."

McCarthy said last week he expected the House GOP's investigations into the foreign business activities of Biden's family would rise to the level of an impeachment inquiry. Democrats and a handful of Republicans have criticized his comments, with some members of his conference saying an impeachment inquiry would serve as a distraction.

Schiff, who served as the House impeachment manager during Trump’s first impeachment trial, noted Sunday that it was unclear whom the House GOP wanted to impeach or what they would impeach Biden for, pointing to GOP members who have discussed impeaching Secretary of Homeland Security Alejandro Mayorkas, Attorney General Merrick Garland and now Biden. He also added that these "kind of faux investigations and this potential abuse of the impeachment power" are "devastating" to the country.

"I mean, for a long time it didn't appear clear that they even knew who they wanted to impeach," he said. "You know, did they want to impeach [Alejandro Mayorkas] or maybe Merrick Garland, or maybe Joe Biden, or maybe somebody else."

House Democrat says Biden pardoning his son would be a ‘mistake’

Posted on July 30, 2023 (Updated July 30, 2023) by Lauren Sforza

Rep. Dan Goldman (D-N.Y.) said it would be a "mistake" if President Biden opted to pardon his son Hunter Biden who is facing federal tax charges after a plea agreement appeared to fall apart during an initial court appearance this week.

ABC's Jonathan Karl asked Goldman if Biden pardoning his son would be a "mistake," noting that Biden has not come out publicly to say that he would.

"Yes, and I don't think there's any chance that President Biden is going to do that, unlike his predecessor, who pardoned all of his friends, and anyone who had any access to him," Goldman responded.

"President Biden has restored the integrity of the Department of Justice," he added. "And I think you've seen that in this case, where he kept on and Merrick Garland kept on a Trump appointed US attorney to investigate the president's son, if there is not an indication of the independence of the Department of Justice. Beyond that, I don't know what what we could look for."

White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre has sharply suggested that the president would not pardon his son.

Hunter Biden is facing tax and gun charges and was expected to plead guilty to two misdemeanor counts of willful failure to pay income taxes after reaching a plea deal with the Justice Department last month. After the judge overseeing his case questioned the scope of Hunter Biden's plea deal, Biden pleaded not guilty during his first court appearance last week in order to give the legal teams more time to come up with a new agreement.

Republicans have compared the cases brought against the president's son and former President Trump, with many claiming the Justice Department is a "two-tier system of justice." House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) floated the idea of an impeachment inquiry into Biden in connection to his son and family businesses.

Frustration emerges among GOP spending ‘cardinals’ as conservatives push for cuts

Posted on July 30, 2023 (Updated July 31, 2023) by Aris Folley

The House Republicans who craft the conference’s government funding bills are showing signs of frustration as hard-line conservatives pressure leadership for further cuts to spending that some worry could be too aggressive.

Some of the 12 Appropriations subcommittee chairs — the so-called cardinals — told reporters that they are struggling to see where those additional cuts could come from, as September's shutdown deadline looms.

“I just don't see the wisdom in trying to further cut to strengthen our hand. I don't know how that strengthens our hand,” Rep. Steve Womack (R-Ark.), a House Appropriations subcommittee chairman, said of conservatives’ push to further cut the already-scaled-back spending bills.

“I do think it puts some of our members in a very difficult spot, particularly those in tough districts, because they're going to be taking some votes that become problematic,” he added.

The House left Washington for a long summer recess Thursday after being forced to punt a bill to fund agriculture and the Food and Drug Administration.

Conservatives are dug in on their demand for steeper spending cuts, to the chagrin of moderates who are wary of slashing funding even more. The chamber has passed just one appropriations bill, funding military construction and the Department of Veterans Affairs.

The internal divisions are gripping the party as time is running out: The House has just 12 days in September to move the remaining 11 appropriations measures and hash out their disagreements with the Senate, which is marking up its spending bills at higher levels, setting the scene for a hectic fall that could bring the U.S. to the brink of a shutdown.

Those dynamics are putting GOP appropriators in a bind, leaving them searching for ways to appease conservative requests without gutting their spending bills.

“We’ve done a lot of cuts, a lot of cuts,” House Appropriations Committee Chairwoman Kay Granger (R-Texas) told The Hill this week. “And so if it’s cuts just for cut's sake, I don’t agree with it. But if it’s something that we can do without, that’s fine.”

‘Not a lot of wiggle room left’

Republican appropriators in the House announced earlier this year that they would mark up their bills for fiscal 2024 at fiscal 2022 levels, as leaders sought to placate conservatives who thought the debt ceiling deal struck by President Biden and Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) earlier this year didn’t do enough to curb spending.

The Senate is crafting its bills more in line with the budget caps agreed to in the deal, but House Republicans are already fuming about a bipartisan deal in the upper chamber that would allow for more than $13 billion in additional emergency spending on top of those levels.

House GOP negotiators also said they would pursue clawing back more than $100 billion in old funding that was allocated for Democratic priorities without GOP support in the previous Congress.

While that move drew support from hard-line conservatives, the right flank was far from pleased when it heard appropriators planned to repurpose that old funding — known as rescissions — to plus-up the spending bills.

In a letter to McCarthy earlier this month, a group of hard-line conservatives called for all 12 appropriations bills to be in line with fiscal 2022 spending levels “without the use of reallocated rescissions to increase discretionary spending above that top-line.”

Otherwise, the 21 lawmakers threatened, they would vote against the measures. But that request could prove difficult for GOP appropriators to fulfill.

Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart (R-Fla.), chairman of the panel that proposes funding for the Department of State and foreign operations, said that appropriators are already “dramatically reducing spending,” suggesting that there are not too many remaining areas to trim from.

“My bill is below the 2016 levels,” he said, later adding, “When you’re below the 2016 level — and we're still confronting China — I think there's not a lot of wiggle room left.”

“It’s a challenge, but I think we’ll get through it. I really do,” he added.

Rep. Mike Simpson (R-Idaho), who heads the subcommittee that oversees funding for the Environmental Protection Agency and the Department of Interior, scoffed at the idea of even steeper cuts to his bill.

“Then you just drop it on the floor and stomp on it. What else do you do with it?” he told reporters. “You can’t make logical cuts in there.”

Republicans appropriators are voicing optimism that the conference will be able to sort out its differences on spending, but some also hope their levels will stick — even though they include rescissions.

Rep. Chuck Fleischmann (R-Tenn.) — whose panel handles funding for the Department of Energy, which is proposing offsetting billions of dollars in spending with clawbacks — said it would be “extremely difficult” to craft his bill without the rescinded funds.

“And given our priorities in my bill, national defense with the nuclear weapons portfolio, nuclear cleanup, Army Corps including, all the community-directed fundings, I feel good about my bill, and I hope my numbers hold,” he said.

“Because it's gonna have to be in negotiations with the Senate and the White House as well,” he added.

Womack — whose subcommittee crafts funding for the IRS and the Treasury Department — said he doesn’t think “moving the goalposts on these numbers is helpful in strengthening our ability to negotiate with the Senate.”

August preparations for a busy September

Frustrations among appropriators are bubbling up as Congress inches closer to the fall, when lawmakers are facing a Sept. 30 deadline to approve funding or risk a government shutdown.

With time running out, some House lawmakers say conversations may continue over the long August recess to try to hash out remaining differences.

“We'll have to see,” Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas) said when asked about potential plans for talks between leaders and House Freedom Caucus members over the break. “I mean, we got a lot of work to do.”

“I think a lot of work [has] got to be done behind the scenes,” he said. “If not, you know, here — You gotta beg the question about whether we should be gone for six weeks. We should be getting our job done.”

Rep. Bob Good (R-Va.) echoed that sentiment, saying “I would think so” when asked if lawmakers will have conversations over the break.

Adding to the August workload, House Majority Leader Steve Scalise (R-La.) suggested earlier this week that bicameral negotiations could take place over the weeks-long recess as lawmakers stare down the shutdown deadline.

Not all Republicans, however, are viewing a shutdown as a risk.

During a House Freedom Caucus press conference this week, Good said “we should not fear a government shutdown,” claiming that “most of what we do up here is bad anyway; most of what we do up here hurts the American people.”

But that perspective does not jive with the view of McCarthy, who declared Thursday: “I don’t want the government to shut down.”

Multiple Republicans are ultimately expecting Congress to eventually pass what's known as a continuing resolution (CR), or a measure that temporarily allows the government to be funded at the previous fiscal year’s levels, to prevent a lapse at the end of September.

But they also understand the task could be difficult in the GOP-led chamber, where Republicans aren’t happy about the idea of continuing funding at the current levels — which were last set when Democrats held control of Congress.

“I think there's a very good chance that we'll see a CR, but I know there's a lot of work to get a CR done,” Rep. Robert Aderholt (R-Ala.), another appropriator, said Thursday, noting there are “a lot of members that don't want CRs that are tired of them.”

But Aderholt suggested a CR could notch sufficient GOP backing if there’s a larger plan in sight that the party can support.

“The Speaker’s been very good about having a plan,” he said, adding, “I think that's what he's good at, and I'm optimistic that he can come up with something.”

Emily Brooks contributed.

Democrats balk at Alito assertion that Congress has ‘no authority’ over Supreme Court

Posted on July 29, 2023 (Updated July 30, 2023) by Tara Suter

Democratic lawmakers are criticizing Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito’s recent interview with The Wall Street Journal (WSJ) in which he stated “no provision” in the Constitution allows Congress to regulate the Supreme Court.

“I know this is a controversial view, but I’m willing to say it,” Alito said Friday, referencing Congressional Democrats’ recent efforts to mandate stronger ethics rules. “No provision in the Constitution gives them the authority to regulate the Supreme Court — period.”

"I don’t know that any of my colleagues have spoken about it publicly ... But I think it is something we have all thought about," he told the Journal.

His remarks sparked pushback from a slew of House Democrats.

Rep. Ted Lieu (D-Calif.) argued Congress would always have regulation power over the high court.

"Dear Justice Alito: You’re on the Supreme Court in part because Congress expanded the Court to 9 Justices,” Lieu posted Friday on X, the platform formerly known as Twitter. "Congress can impeach Justices and can in many cases strip the Court of jurisdiction."

"Congress has always regulated you and will continue to do so," he added. "You are not above the law."

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) claimed the Supreme Court should be the "most scrutinized" because of its power.

“What a surprise, guy who is supposed to enforce checks and balances thinks checks shouldn’t apply to him," Ocasio-Cortez wrote. "Corruption and abuse of power must be stopped, no matter the source," she added. "In fact, the court should be *most* subject to scrutiny, bc it is unelected & life appointed."

“Alito’s next opinion piece in the WSJ is about to be ‘I am a little king, actually. The Constitution doesn’t explicitly say I’m not,’” she added in a separate post.

Both California Democratic Reps. Katie Porter and Adam Schiff also responded to the justice's remarks, calling his view "controversial."

“This view is more than controversial; it’s incorrect,” Porter said on X. “This is coming from a justice who tried to hide the fact that he accepted luxury vacations on private jets. As a government official, I welcome the American people holding me accountable—why doesn’t Justice Alito?”

Schiff, referring to the ProPublica report that revealed an undisclosed Alaskan fishing trip the justice accepted in 2008 that was paid for by a conservative donor, said Alito's view shows why an "enforceable code of ethics" is needed. The investigation — paired with another that revealed Justice Clarence Thomas received financial gifts without disclosing them — ultimately led to lawmakers' push for the ethics review.

“Let’s translate these statements from Justice Alito, real quick: What we do and how we do it, who pays for our trips and our vacations, or a family member’s tuition, is none of your damn business,” Schiff posted on X. “So buzz off. They need an enforceable code of ethics. Now.”

Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), the sponsor of a bill to reform Supreme Court ethics standards and a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, also shared on social media that the Journal author of the interview with Alito is the lawyer for Leonard Leo, a prominent conservative legal activist who reportedly organized the fishing trip to Alaska that Alito attended alongside Paul Singer, a hedge fund manager whose plane they took.

“The lawyer who ‘wrote’ this is also the lawyer blocking our investigation into Leonard Leo’s Supreme Court freebies,” Whitehouse tweeted. “Shows how small and shallow the pool of operatives is around this captured Court — same folks keep popping up wearing new hats.”

Sen. Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii) claimed that Alito’s comments seemed “escalatory” and were meant to provoke a response.

“This seems escalatory, and nudges even reluctant court watchers and skeptics of statutory reforms towards doing something,” Schatz said. “I mean, this is a fancy way of telling everyone to pound sand because he’s untouchable.”

Other Democrats who offered their criticism of the Supreme Court justice's words include Rep. Ritchie Torres (N.Y.), Sen. Tina Smith (Minn.), Sen. Martin Heinrich (N.M.) and former Rep. Mondaire Jones (N.Y.).

GOP Rep. John James slams DeSantis for curriculum comments on slavery: ‘You’ve gone too far’

Posted on July 29, 2023 (Updated July 29, 2023) by Tara Suter

Rep. John James (R-Mich.) criticized Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) on Friday for his response to Republican lawmakers who called him out on his state’s new Black history education standards Friday.

“@RonDeSantis, #1: slavery was not CTE!” James posted on X, the platform formerly known as Twitter. “Nothing about that 400 years of evil was a ‘net benefit’ to my ancestors. #2: there are only five black Republicans in Congress and you’re attacking two of them.”

Both Rep. Byron Donalds (R-Fla.) and Sen. Tim Scott (R-S.C.) have criticized the new standards, which indicate that American slavery helped enslaved people develop “skills” that benefited them, in the past few days.

Scott rebuked the language during a campaign stop in Iowa on Thursday, claiming "there is no silver lining in slavery."

“Slavery was really about separating families, about mutilating humans and even raping their wives," he said. "It was just devastating."

DeSantis responded to the lawmakers by saying they were falling in line with Vice President Kamala Harris, who called the guidelines "propaganda."

“They dare to push propaganda to our children,” Harris said earlier this week in Jacksonville, Fla. “Adults know what slavery really involved. It involved rape. It involved torture. It involved taking a baby from their mother.”

James pleaded with DeSantis to change course.

“My brother in Christ… if you find yourself in a deep hole put the shovel down,” he wrote. “You are now so far from the Party of Lincoln that your Ed. board is re-writing history and you’re personally attacking conservatives like [Scott] and [Donalds] on the topic of slavery."

"You’ve gone too far. Stop," he added.

Category: House