"Trump's endorsement is significant and may save Johnson," Rep. Troy Nehls (R-Texas) told Axios.
What he's saying: "Speaker Mike Johnson is a good, hard working, religious man. He will do the right thing, and we will continue to WIN," Trump said in a post on Truth Social.
He added: "Mike has my Complete & Total Endorsement. MAGA!!!"
Johnson, in a post on X, said he is "honored and humbled" by Trump's support, adding, "The American people demand and deserve that we waste no time. Let's get to work!"
State of play: Johnson is set to have a 219-215 majority on Jan. 3 and will likely be able to afford just a single GOP defection and still be reelected.
Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) has said he will vote for an alternative to Johnson, with several other right-wingers saying they are undecided.
Democrats have signaled that they will all vote for House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.), denying Johnson crossover support.
Between the lines: Many of Johnson's right-wing skeptics are also firm Trump loyalists who will likely be swayed by the president-elect's endorsement.
Nehls, who told Axios earlier this month he was undecided on whether to vote for Johnson, said Monday: "If DJT supports Johnson we need to rally around Johnson."
But others like Massie have flexed their independence from the president-elect, and one House Republican predicted to Axios on Monday that Johnson could still face a handful of defections on the first ballot.
Editor's note: This story has been updated with additional reporting.
If measured by the number of bills signed into law, the 118th Congress was by far the most unproductive since at least the 1980s, according to data from public affairs firm Quorum.
Why it matters: That is not the only metric of success, but the stunning stat is a marker of how difficult the chaos of the last two years made actual legislating.
Every fiscal deadline led to brinksmanship between the Republican House and the Democratic Senate and White House.
Throughout the disarray, trust between House Democrats and Republicans reached a low ebb— making bipartisan compromise rare.
By the numbers: The 118th Congress passed just under 150 bills over the last two years, according to the Quorum data provided to Axios.
That's down from more than 350 passed in the previous Congress — in which Democrats held control of both chambers and the White House.
The 17 Congresses since the start of George H.W. Bush's presidency in 1989 have passed an average of more than 380 laws.
Zoom in: Split partisan control of Congress and the White House can account for much of the disparity.
Aside from this Congress, the previously most unproductive sessions were the 112th and 113th — in which Republicans controlled the House and clashed bitterly with President Obama.
After that, it was the 104th, in which President Clinton faced a similar dynamic with a Republican-controlled Congress.
Still, those Congresses passed more than 270, 280 and 310 bills, respectively, making them far more productive than the 118th.
Between the lines: There is more than one way to pass a law, as this month's government funding fight demonstrated.
A nearly 1,550-page stopgap spending bill was packed to the gills with tangential legislation on health care, U.S. investment in China, RFK Stadium in D.C. and congressional pay and benefits.
Those measures — called "riders," because they ride a larger, must-pass package — would have counted as one law for the purpose of this statistic.
What to watch: The big test for House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) next year will be to prove that this Congress' lack of legislative productivity was the result of split partisan control and not GOP infighting.
Republicans are set to control the House, Senate and White House, but Johnson's agonizingly small majority will afford him at times one or even zero defections on party-line bills.
His first test will come on Jan. 3, when Congress elects the speaker. Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) has said he won't vote for Johnson, while many other right-wingers remain undecided.
The once-fringe idea of Democrats appearing on conservative-leaning media is suddenly going mainstream in the wake of the party's 2024 election losses.
Why it matters: Nearly a dozen House Democrats tell Axios that party members need to increase their appearances on conservative-leaning and non-traditional platforms, or risk irrelevance.
They say they no longer can look past the huge audiences offered by Fox News and conservative podcasts, whose messaging power became evident when Republicans swept the White House and both chambers of Congress in last month's election.
"If half the country is watching and we gotta win 50% plus one, how can you reach anybody when you're not talking where they go?" Rep. Jared Moskowitz (D-Fla.) told Axios.
Driving the news: Most Democrats still prefer to stick to friendly outlets such as MSNBC or the more neutral CNN, where they can typically avoid confrontations and adversarial interviews.
"I think one of the lessons learned from the 2024 election is that we have all but ceded alternative media to the conservative movement," said Rep. Ritchie Torres (D-N.Y.).
"If we have confidence in our message, we should be prepared to take our message to every corner of the ecosystem — including in politically hostile environments."
Zoom in: Some Democrats — inside and outside of Congress — have expressed post-election jealousy over how President-elect Trump used a hyper-focused media strategy to connect with specific voter demographics, particularly young men, by appearing on podcasts and YouTube shows with massive followings.
Democrats say many of their own campaigns — from Vice President Harris' on down — focused too much on friendly outlets with declining audiences that already agreed with them.
Rep. Jared Golden (D-Maine) — who was re-elected in a district where Trump defeated Harris by nearly 10 percentage points — outlined a more local approach to this strategy.
Golden told Axios that he goes on local conservative radio shows in Maine: "You've got to contest every corner ... Otherwise all they hear is what's said about you by the other side."
Zoom out: Adversarial media appearances by Democrats were rare during Trump's first presidency until several 2020 Democratic presidential candidates — including Bernie Sanders and Pete Buttigieg — appeared in Fox News town halls.
As transportation secretary, Buttigieg has gone further, using Fox as a venue to clinically defend Democrats' positions while skewering Republicans in front of many of their own voters.
But only now — in the wake of 2024's election disappointments and amid calls for a Democratic rebrand— is Buttigieg's approach being widely embraced.
Between the lines: As cable news networks face declining viewership numbers across the board, Fox News Channel is still maintaining its relevance. It ended 2024 as the most-watched network during the election cycle — and saw increasing viewership among Democrats and independents.
Fox News was the most-watched news network across the seven swing states last month's election.
Even progressives are beginning to embrace the idea of expanding Democrats' media reach: "My view is, as much engagement as possible is good," Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) told Axios.
Rep. Becca Balint (D-Vt.), another progressive, told Axios that "as a gay woman, I have a particular view on the world and I actually think that it could be really helpful in this moment."
Several Democrats told Axios that revamping their party's media strategy should involve much more than simply going on conservative-leaning media.
Rep. Maxwell Frost (D-Fla.), co-chair of House Democrats' political messaging arm, underscored that appearing on conservative media is important, but it's not "where the jackpot is."
"We need to speak to people who don't consume news as a hobby.... That's not just going on Fox News ... it's going on places of culture, sports, different things like that," he said.
The other side: Rep. Jasmine Crockett (D-Texas) is among the Democrats who are more skeptical about engaging with conservative media.
"People that watch Fox News have their minds made up about the type of rhetoric that they want to listen to," Crockett said.
"God bless those that go on there, but I don't think that we're really changing the minds of the people that have decided that they want to watch that bullsh*t,"she added.
The bottom line: Beyond simply going on alternative media himself, Moskowitz said he has actively been trying to persuade colleagues to follow his lead.
Asked whether he thinks he's changed some minds, he told Axios: "I think I have, because I think you're seeing the number of people increasing that are doing that."
The House Ethics Committee's report into former Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.) had been poised to stay officially buried — until two centrist Republicans on the panel unexpectedly voted to release it, Axios has learned.
Gaetz, who has denied any wrongdoing, filed an 11th-hour lawsuit Monday morning seeking to block the report's publication, alleging it "contains untruthful and defamatory information."
What we're hearing: Reps. Dave Joyce (R-Ohio) and Andrew Garbarino (R-N.Y.) sided with the committee's five Democrats in voting to release the report, two sources familiar with the matter told Axios.
Chair Michael Guest (R-Miss.), along with Reps. Michelle Fischbach (R-Minn.) and John Rutherford (R-Fla.), opposed doing so, arguing the panel lost jurisdiction after Gaetz resigned, the sources said.
It was a reversal from when the committee split along party lines in a November vote on releasing the report, thus keeping it under wraps.
What they're saying: Guest, in a statement after the report was released on Monday, confirmed that he "did not vote to support the release of the report."
"I take great exception that the majority deviated from the Committee's well-established standards and voted to release a report on an individual no longer under the Committee's jurisdiction," he said.
Guest also led a one-page dissent that was appended to the report "on behalf of the members of the committee" who voted against its release that said the lawmakers "do not challenge the Committee's finding."
Spokespeople for Fischbach, Joyce and the Ethics Committee declined to comment, while spokespeople for Garbarino and Rutherford did not respond to requests for comment.
Zoom in: The report accused Gaetz of violating state and federal law, as well as House rules, including by "regularly" paying for sex between 2017 and 2019, having sex with a 17-year-old in 2017 and using illicit drugs "on multiple occasions" between 2017 and 2019.
The report also alleged Gaetz "continuously sought to deflect, deter, or mislead" the committee to the point of obstruction.
Gaetz has vigorously denied the allegations in the report and publicly disparaged the Ethics Committee and some of its members, including Guest and Joyce.
Editor's note: This story has been updated with additional reporting.
House Democrats are sending an early warning signal to Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) that he shouldn't count on them to rescue him again.
Why it matters: Johnson will have the barest of majorities next year — and he's staring down growing unrest within the Republican conference.
Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) has said he will vote against Johnson's reelection as speaker on Jan. 3, with several other Republicans saying they are undecided.
With a majority as narrow as 219-215, Johnson may only be able to afford to lose one vote.
State of play: Johnson last week abandoned a federal funding package he negotiated with Democrats and introduced a pared-down version with a debt limit extension demanded by President-elect Trump.
House Democrats bitterly accused Johnson of going back on his word and declared themselves a "hell no" on the revised version of the bill.
Johnson eventually succeeded in passing a version of the bill without a debt ceiling increase, but the damage was already done.
Driving the news: At a caucus meeting on Friday, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) signaled to his members that relations with Johnson had entered a new, significantly worsened phase.
He pointed to Johnson reversing on the funding deal and letting communications go dark at times during the week, according to three lawmakers and a fourth source present for his remarks.
House Democratic caucus chair Pete Aguilar (D-Calif.) said that he will not personally ask Democrats to bail out Johnson going forward as they did in May.
Jeffries said Sunday on MSNBC's "Inside with Jen Psaki" there is a "real risk" of Johnson failing to become speaker on Jan. 3, and that "there will be no Democrats available to save him."
What they're saying: More than half a dozen House Democrats who voted to bail out Johnson in May told Axios on Sunday that they agree with Jeffries that Johnson can no longer count on their votes.
"I will follow leadership," said Rep. Henry Cuellar (D-Texas), one of the party's most centrist members.
Rep. Tom Suozzi (D-N.Y.), another arch-centrist, told Axios of the speaker election: "I'm voting for Hakeem Jeffries."
"He is correct," Rep. Haley Stevens (D-Mich.) said of Jeffries' comments on MSNBC.
Zoom in: Johnson's reelection bid is currently backed by Trump and his conference unanimously renominated him for speaker last month, but even if he wins in January he will face the challenge of keeping his gavel.
House Republicans increased the threshold for introducing a "motion to vacate" — a measure to remove the speaker — but any nine lawmakers would still be able to force such a vote.
And Johnson is facing growing anger from both his right flank and the GOP's right-wing grassroots outside of Congress, who are demanding he do more to cut government spending.
Rep. Troy Nehls (R-Texas), who is undecided on voting for Johnson, told Axios last week the speaker will need to rely on Democratic votes to keep his job.
What we're hearing: "I have thought multiple times that I would help Johnson in a tough Speaker vote because he was true to his word even in hard times," said one swing-district House Democrat.
"That has absolutely changed now. Trust is all we have in these negotiations. I thought Johnson was truly different. He's no better than McCarthy. He's getting no help from me and I know many of my colleagues feel the same."
Rep. Becca Balint (D-Vt.), a progressive who voted against ousting Johnson in May, told Axios: "He has betrayed our trust and we will never trust him again to hold to any agreement."
The bottom line: "It's up to the Republicans to lead on governance now," said Stevens, noting that Democrats were voted fully out of power in November.
"If they need us they have to really make it worth our while, but [it] doesn't seem likely that they will," she added.
Congress' long-simmering debate over the age of its members has resurfaced over revelations that Rep. Kay Granger (R-Texas) has been living in an independent living facility in Texas.
Why it matters: The retiring former House Appropriations Committee chair's absence from votes since July has led some of her colleagues to raise concerns.
The latest: Granger acknowledged in a Sunday statement to Axios that she has "been navigating some unforeseen health challenges over the past year."
"Since early September, my health challenges have progressed making frequent travel to Washington both difficult and unpredictable."
Granger's son Brandon told the Dallas Morning News that she has been "having some dementia issues late in the year."
Yes, but: Brandon Granger pushed back on a report from the Dallas Express – whose CEO Chris Putnam ran against Granger in 2020 – that his mother was living in a memory care facility.
Instead, he said, she resides in the independent living facility of Tradition Senior Living in Fort Worth, which advertises itself as a "luxury senior living community."
A source familiar with the matter told Axios that Granger moved into the independent senior living facility around July.
What they're saying: Rep. Ritchie Torres (D-N.Y.) told Axios in a statement that the public "is entitled to far greater transparency about the health of the elected officials who represent them."
"The incapacitation of an elected official is a material fact that should be disclosed to the public, rather than concealed by staff," he added.
Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) called for term limits in a post on X, saying Granger's absence "reveals the problem with a Congress that rewards seniority & relationships more than merit & ideas."
Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) said in a post on X responding to the Dallas Express report that he is "more concerned about the congressmen who have dementia and are still voting."
Zoom in: A House Republican, speaking on the condition of anonymity regarding Granger's absence, said it's "absolutely" worrying because her constituents "don't have a vote."
The lawmaker said there's not enough political will yet to address Congress' age issue, but "there should be."
What we're hearing: The first source told Axios that Granger would have made different preparations had she known she would be unable to vote towards the end of the session, citing the unforeseen progression of her illness.
Granger was also clear with leadership about her situation and said she would return to D.C. to vote if she was needed, the source said.
The source also argued that her resignation would have left the seat vacant until January and still created a representation issue.
Zoom out: Granger stepped down as the Appropriations Committee chair in April and will retire on Jan. 3 when her term expires.
Granger's status was highlighted by her missing a vote on Friday to avert a government shutdown, despite her past leadership of the panel that deals with government funding.
She was, however, present at the Capitol in November when her portrait was unveiled to honor her long-standing work as a member of the House Appropriations Committee.
Granger said in her statement on Sunday that, while in D.C. last month, she was able to hold "meetings on behalf of my constituents, express my gratitude to my staff, and oversee the closure of my Washington office."
Between the lines: While leadership may have been kept in the loop, several rank-and-file House members from both parties told Axios they were unaware of Granger's living situation until this weekend.
Rep. Tony Gonzales (R-Texas), a member of Granger's delegation, said Sunday on CBS News' "Face the Nation" that he was not aware of Granger's condition but acknowledged there was "no doubt a lot of us knew she was gaining in age like a lot of members do."
Republican members of Congress took to the Sunday shows to praise Trump lieutenant Elon Musk's involvement in last week's government funding saga, with one likening him to "our prime minister."
Why it matters: The tech billionaire's influence is being fueled by threats to fund electoral challenges against those who defy him, creating a powerful incentive for Republicans to go along with his demands.
Democrats have harshly criticized Musk for lambasting and ultimately helping to kill a bipartisan government funding deal they struck with House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) last week.
What they're saying: "It's kind of interesting, we have a president, we have a vice president, we have a speaker. It feels like Elon Musk is our prime minister," Rep. Tony Gonzales (R-Texas) said in a CBS "Face the Nation" hit.
Gonzales said he spoke with Musk "a couple times this week," adding that "many of us" did so while acknowledging the Tesla CEO is "unelected."
Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) said on Fox News' "Sunday Morning Futures" that his idea to elect Musk as House speaker "might have been tongue-in-cheek," but, "I do appreciate his input."
"Thank god Elon Musk bought Twitter, because that's the only way we would even know what's in this bill," Sen. Bill Hagerty (R-Tenn.) said of Musk's efforts to kill the bipartisan bill on CNN's "State of the Union."
Yes, but: Hagerty pushed back on Democrats' assertions that Musk is pulling Trump's strings, saying Trump is "clearly the leader" of the Republican Party.
Musk's influence "doesn't bother me a bit," Haggerty said, adding he is "appreciative of the fact that President Trump has that type of talent available to advise him."
The other side: Sen. Chris Coons (D-Del.) said on "State of the Union" that he is "concerned" about what Musk's role "is going to mean."
Coons, like other Democrats, noted that the revised version of the spending bill excluded restrictions on outbound investment to China that were part of the original bill Musk harangued.
"Given that Tesla has a major new factory in Shanghai, that may actually benefit Elon Musk's business," Coons alleged.
House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) notched a major win Friday by averting a government shutdown, but it has not taken him out of the woods in his fight to retain the speaker's gavel on Jan. 3.
Why it matters: Johnson will likely be able to bank just one GOP defection and still win. Many in the right-wing Freedom Caucus aren't committing to vote for him yet.
"Everybody's got different issues," Rep. Ralph Norman (R-S.C.) said of his fellow undecideds – including opinions on what Johnson "should be doing to rally support for various issues."
Some, he said, wish the notoriously congenial speaker was "more forceful like Nancy Pelosi."
State of play: Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) said this week he will vote for an alternative candidate – burning the single vote Johnson will likely have to spare in his incoming 219-215 majority.
Plenty more said they are undecided, including Norman and Reps. Tim Burchett (R-Tenn.), Andy Biggs (R-Ariz.), Troy Nehls (R-Texas) and Victoria Spartz (R-Ind.).
Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) floated making Elon Musk speaker, including in a survey sent out by email from her congressional office.
Rep. Josh Brecheen (R-Okla.), asked after the Friday spending vote whether he will support Johnson on Jan. 3, told Axios: "No comment."
What they're saying: Rep. Eli Crane (R-Ariz.), another undecided, told Axios on Friday that "it's possible" Johnson will have trouble securing the support he needs.
"I've heard of many frustrations of people outside the Freedom Caucus" as well as inside, Crane added.
After Friday's vote, Norman told Axios: "We can't let this happen again. We've got to force the issue."
Freedom Caucus Chair Andy Harris (R-Md.), who told Axios on Wednesday he was supporting Johnson, declared after the vote Friday he was "now undecided."
Between the lines: Johnson, like Kevin McCarthy before him, has faced frequent uprisings from his most right-leaning members for working across the aisle on issues like Ukraine aid and government funding.
The right has also pressed GOP leadership to be more willing to shut the government down or even allow the U.S. to default on its debts in order to secure concessions from Democrats on spending and social policy.
Both McCarthy and Johnson have opted to cut deals with Democrats than allow those scenarios to play out.
Massie and Greene tried to oust Johnson from the speakership in May, but just 10 Republicans voted for the motion to remove him while 163 Democrats crossed the aisle to rescue him.
Yes, but: For the moment, Johnson retains by far the biggest asset of any GOP speaker candidate – the support of President-elect Trump.
Johnson was unanimously renominated for speaker by the House Republican conference last month after Trump endorsed him in the room.
Burchett, asked about Johnson's reelection chances on Friday, said Trump "will play a role in that" and that Johnson "did what he asked" on the spending fight.
Zoom in: Rep. Max Miller (R-Ohio), who has been one of Johnson's harshest critics at times, said the speaker handled the funding fight "the best way that he possibly could."
"I just don't know who'd be next, and I don't want the chaos. We all want stability," Miller said of the speaker vote.
Another House Republican who has been critical of Johnson at times told Axios they "haven't heard much about" any organized effort to defeat him.
The bottom line: Johnson will likely have a whip operation on his hands for the two weeks leading up to the vote.
"It's such a slim majority that he'd be foolish to not want to touch base with everybody just to make sure," said Rep. Eric Burlison (R-Mo.).
House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) has privately floated embracing the wholesale elimination of the debt limit next year rather than simply raising it, Axios has learned.
Why it matters: President-elect Trump will almost certainly need Democratic votes when the debt limit's "X-date" is reached — which experts say could be as soon as mid-June.
Republicans have a significant bloc of debt and deficit hawks who will likely vote against raising the debt ceiling under any circumstances.
That gives the Democratic leader considerable leverage to use the debt limit to force concessions.
State of play: House Democrats ruled out touching the debt ceiling as part of the government funding negotiations.
When the funding fight is wrapped up, Jeffries has said, his party may engage with Trump's demand that the debt ceiling be done away with, according to a senior Democratic lawmaker and two other sources familiar with the matter.
Zoom out: Trump stunned Capitol Hill on Thursday by vowing to "lead the charge" to abolish the debt ceiling as part of a government funding bill.
Democrats opted for formal opposition to the idea — with many arguing it would simply be a blank check for Trump's tax cuts.
But scrapping the debt ceiling is a proposal many in the party have long embraced — and some Democrats like Rep. Don Beyer (D-Va.) and Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) couldn't help but endorse Trump's stipulation.
What we're hearing: Rep. Brendan Boyle (D-Pa.), Jeffries' leader on the House Budget Committee, has been telling colleagues "all week" that they should push for the elimination of the debt limit, a House Democrat told Axios.
Boyle introduced a bill with dozens of his House Democratic colleagues last year to allow the Treasury Department to keep paying down the federal debt unless a veto-proof majority of Congress votes to stop them.
He told Axios: "I believe 2025 is the time to permanently end the perennial debt ceiling dysfunction. I have been advocating for my Debt Ceiling Reform Act, which would end the debt ceiling as we know it."
Zoom in: Eliminating the debt limit has also been discussed amongst Senate Democrats, with Warren raising the issue in private caucus meetings this week, per sources.
Warren will become the top Democrat on the influential Senate Banking Committee next year, shaping the caucus' messaging on fiscal fights next year.
Yes, but: Trump would likely have trouble with his own side and face pressure to back off eliminating the debt ceiling if he pursues it.
Nearly 40 Republicans voted with Democrats against a government funding bill on Thursday that included a two-year debt limit extension.
That vote came even after Trump's potent threat of primary challenges against Republicans who defy him.
The bottom line: One senior Democratic aide told Axios that Elon Musk's involvement in spending negotiations had poisoned the well and that the party was focused on averting a government shutdown.
If that is done, the aide said, the party would engage in discussions about how to address the debt limit.
The U.S. House failed to pass a bill to extend federal funding on Thursday night — just one day before the government is set to shut down.
Why it matters: The spending measure's demise prolongs a chaotic fight that has seen House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) forced to repeatedly change tactics.
The Trump-backed bill failed to garner the necessary two-thirds majority, with more than three dozen Republicans and nearly all Democrats opposing it.
The level of GOP opposition signals that Republican leaders will have difficulty trying to bring it up under another process.
Driving the news: The final vote was 235 members voting against the bill and 174 voting in favor — with 38 Republicans voting against the measure and two Democrats voting in support.
State of play: Johnson had initially cut a deal with Democratic leaders on a nearly 1,550 page bill to extend government funding until March 14.
The bill was packed with bipartisan legislative priorities, including disaster relief, farm aid and a pay raise for members of Congress.
But the GOP's right-flank descended on the measure, with billionaire-turned-Trump-adviser Elon Musk emerging as a particular critic, culminating in Trump torpedoing it on Wednesday.
Johnson then scrambled to rewrite the bill, cutting several provisions and tacking on a two-year debt ceiling extension that Trump demanded.
What they're saying: Democrats emerged from a closed-door meeting Thursday uniformly opposed to the bill and furious at Republicans for going back on the initial deal.
"To come back with this proposal which demolishes loads of significant things that were in the agreement, is an affront and an insult especially because they didn't even consult our leadership," said Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.).
The revised bill was also insufficient for some conservative deficit hawks, with Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas) among the bill's opponents.
President-elect Trump called a revised stopgap spending plan that emerged Thursday a "very good Deal for the American People" and urged lawmakers to support it.
Trump further complicated matters Thursday when he told NBC News he supports abolishing the debt ceiling and is prepared to "lead the charge" to make it happen.
"It's a laughable proposal," House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) said in response to the bill.
Jeffries characterized the bill as a "Trump-Musk-Johnson" proposal.
The latest version of the measure would fund the government through March, suspend the debt ceiling until January of 2027, extend the farm bill for a year and provide roughly $100 billion for disaster aid.
Provisions increasing congressional pay, allowing the Washington Commanders football team to return to D.C. and redirecting spending on prescription drugs to health plans and pharmaceutical companies were dropped. As were restrictions on U.S. investments in China.
GOP lawmakers said House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) was eyeing a Thursday evening floor vote on the measure.
Sources told Axios the initial plan is to bring the measure up under suspension of the rules — a process that requires a two-thirds majority for passage — before likely pivoting to consideration under a rule, which lowers the passage threshold to a simple majority.
The Rules Committee — which would have to sign off on a simple majority passage approach — includes some staunch conservatives unlikely to agree to a two-year suspension of the debt ceiling: Reps. Chip Roy (R-Texas) and Thomas Massie (R-Ky.), for starters.
Regardless of the outcome, the votes could give Trump visibility into which Republicans are heeding his call to line up behind a proposal he's endorsed.
The other side: Democrats are scrambling to determine how to approach the bill after spending the morning demanding Johnson stick with the original deal.
The House Democratic caucus is meeting Thursday afternoon, according to an invite obtained by Axios, with a senior House Democrat saying the new bill is "under discussion."
Another senior House Democrat told Axios: "Honestly if they put what they are proposing right now on the floor three weeks ago, it would've gotten a lot of votes."
But that might not be the case now: "They're asking us to take less than we had at the beginning of the week in return for a major concession, so 'laughable' is a pretty good word," Rep Jared Huffman (D-Calif.) told Axios.
Donald Trump's idea of abolishing the debt limit is foundering on Capitol Hill as Democrats line up against it and Republicans uncomfortably try to shoot it down without angering the president-elect.
Why it matters: With Trump digging in on the likely unworkable stipulation as part of government spending negotiations, the once-faint prospect of a holiday government shutdown is seeming more and more realistic.
The demand comes after Trump torpedoed a bipartisan deal House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) negotiated to fund the government until March.
State of play: Democrats would be Trump's most likely partners in eliminating the debt ceiling — an idea that has long been palatable in Democratic circles.
But while a handful ofDemocrats have endorsed his approach, the party's official line is that anything but their deal with Johnson is a non-starter.
Many lawmakers are also seizing on Trump policy plans that would raise the deficit — particularly his proposed tax cuts — to justify their opposition.
What they're saying: House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) set the tone Thursday with a social media post saying "hard pass" on even raising the debt ceiling, let alone eliminating it.
"In order to give massive endless tax cuts to Elon Musk and other billionaire oligarchs? I don't know – there might be some wariness to that," Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) said of scrapping the debt limit.
Some Democrats even acknowledged their long-standing support for getting rid of the statutory limit, but said this case is an exception.
Rep. Maxwell Frost (D-Fla.) told Axios: "There's other things we have to weigh now. Am I for eliminating the debt ceiling? Yes, I was for that two years ago, but we have to look at what's in front of us right now as well."
The other side: Many Republicans, by contrast, tried to embrace their party's tendency to oppose even raising the debt ceiling without placing themselves in direct public opposition to Trump.
"That discussion will occur, but I don't know if it's going to happen," House Freedom Caucus chair Andy Harris (R-Md.) said of raising the debt ceiling.
Similarly, Rep. Greg Murphy (R-N.C.) told Axios of eliminating the debt ceiling: "I don't think that's going to happen. I don't see that as happening."
Zoom in: A handful of Republicans did show a willingness to forcefully reject the idea.
"There are proposals to raise it, there are proposals to eliminate it. I won't vote for that," said Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), who said there are "at least 20 to 30 Republicans who are not for raising the debt ceiling or eliminating it."
Paul called the debt ceiling an "important vote" because there "has to be some kind of punishment" for not cracking down on the national debt.
Rep. Bob Good (R-Va.), who lost reelection to a Trump-backed primary rival, is also openly opposed to the idea.
Yes, but: Some Republicans also expressed surprising openness to Trump's demand.
"Overall, we need change. This isn't working. And I don't know that's the idea I would embrace, but I do have some ideas myself," said Rep. John Curtis (R-Utah), a senator-elect.
Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) told reporters the debt limit "hasn't been very effective in constraining the debt, has it? So, I'm open to a discussion."
Zoom in: Johnson spent Thursday huddled in his office with various groups of GOP lawmakers trying to work out a last-minute solution before government funding runs out Friday.
But Trump's abrupt opposition to the deal Johnson struck and his intransigence on the debt ceiling is making that a tall order.
Axios' Stef Kight and Erin Doherty contributed reporting for this story.
Editor's note: This story has been corrected to state that Rand Paul is a senator (not a representative).
Democratic members of Congress are incensed at the outsized power billionaire-turned-Trump lieutenant Elon Musk appears to be exercising over the policymaking process.
Some Republicans have cheered Musk's role, with Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) and Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) even floating Musk as a replacement for House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.).
What they're saying: Coming in and out of a closed-door caucus meeting Thursday, Democrats had an array of colorful descriptors for Musk's standing in Trump's orbit.
"If this is the type of power he has, then he is going to be the unelected co-president of this country and we've got to be super blunt about it," said Rep. Maxwell Frost (D-Fla.).
"He's president and Trump is now vice president," said Rep. Jim McGovern (D-Mass.).
Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) said: "A lot of the Republicans are pushing for him to become speaker of the House, which might be a demotion for him because he's basically the fourth branch of the government."
Between the lines: Some Democrats are transparent about their efforts to aggrandize Musk's stature to drive a wedge between the president-elect and one of his most empowered deputies.
"This is going to turn out to be an epic problem at some point for Donald Trump — the two biggest egos on the planet colliding thinking they are in charge," Pocan told Axios in an interview.
He added: "Donald Trump at some point is not going to accept that. So I'm just going to invest in popcorn for the next year."
Yes, but: Others insist there is genuine anger over the way in which Musk seems to be holding sway.
"It's rage. It's not just frustration — it's rage that we are in a place right now where the House GOP is allowing our government, wholesale, to be bought," said Rep. Becca Balint (D-Vt.).
Rep. Annie Kuster (D-N.H.) said: "He's not American. He doesn't know about our democracy. He doesn't know about our processes." (Musk was born in South Africa but became a naturalized U.S. citizen in 2002).
The Trump transition team and Musk's communications department at X did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
The bottom line: "I'm going to be talking to my folks back home in Vermont who voted for Trump: You thought you voted for Trump, but in fact, Trump just caved to Musk," said Balint.
House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) is facing a sudden flood of renewed threats against his efforts to retain his gavel on Jan. 3.
Why it matters: The resurgence of this long-nascent revolt is being spurred by frustration over a bill he negotiated with Democrats to fund the government until March.
"There's an increasing number of people, after what happened this week, who said they are on the fence," Rep. Andy Harris (R-Md.), the chair of the right-wing House Freedom Caucus, told Axios.
To add insult to injury for Johnson, the offending spending bill was swiftly killed on Wednesday when President-elect Trump came out against it.
Driving the news: Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) told reporters on Wednesday that he is "not voting for" Johnson when the House meets to elect a speaker on Jan. 3.
Massie said he will vote for an alternative candidate instead of voting "present," meaning his vote will count against Johnson.
What we're hearing: It may not just be Massie. Rep. Victoria Spartz (R-Ind.) told reporters on Tuesday she was undecided on whether to vote for Johnson.
"There are going to be more that are saying he shouldn't come back as speaker," said Rep. Troy Nehls (R-Texas), who said he is also undecided.
Rep. Tim Burchett (R-Tenn.), asked about his vote for speaker, told Axios: "I'll make my mind up in January."
Zoom in: Right-wing Republicans inside and outside of Congress raged against Johnson for negotiating a more than 1500-page spending bill that included many legislative add-ons sought by lawmakers in both parties.
In addition to a lack of spending cuts, the bill includes provisions like a congressional pay raise that conservatives balked at.
Many lawmakers also grumbled that the deal was negotiated by leadership without the buy-in of rank-and-file members.
By the numbers: Johnson is set to have a 219-215 majority when Congress meets Jan. 3, meaning he could only lose a single GOP vote and still be elected speaker.
For months he had appeared to be on a glide-path to reelection, bolstered by the backing of Trump.
Even some Republicans who led the charge to oust him spring said they planned to vote for him as recently as last month.
What they're saying: "If Mike Johnson wants to continue to be the speaker, he's going to have to get Democrats to support him. Otherwise, it will be tough for him," Nehls said.
The Texan said it has "been this way for a long time" due to a string of spending deals Johnson has cut with Democrats throughout his tenure.
Harris, who said he is personally supporting Johnson, said the latest spending deal was "the straw that broke the camel's back" for some.
Yes, but: Johnson allies and skeptics alike acknowledged that the frustration may be transitory – and could easily subside with a single Trump tweet.
"Everybody gets riled up over every [stopgap spending bill] since I've been here," said Burchett.
Said a House Republican allied with Johnson: "Everybody says they're not going to do something until they do it."
"Christmas comes, New Years comes, we're up until Jan. 3, we only have until the 6th to get a speaker to certify the election," the lawmaker said. "Good luck."
The bottom line: One potential chaos factor for Johnson is Trump, who is now demanding a debt ceiling extension that could be tough for Johnson to execute in an extremely limited time frame.
Rep. Robert Aderholt (R-Ala.) told Axios it "would be very difficult" to work out a debt ceiling deal in just two days.
On top of the anticipated conservative opposition to House Speaker Mike Johnson's (R-La.) deal with Democrats to fund the government, consternation is emerging from unusual corners of Congress.
Why it matters: Provisions raising congressional pay and allowing members of Congress to opt out of the Affordable Care Act have some lawmakers sweating the potential political fallout.
"They all want the [pay raise] and actual health insurance but don't want to vote for them," one House Republican told Axios.
"There's some grumbling," said a senior House Democrat.
Driving the news: The spending bill would repeal language in a stopgap spending bill passed earlier this year that freezes an automatic cost-of-living adjustment (COLA) for members of Congress.
It would be the first time since 2009 that members of Congress got a pay increase.
It also includes language that would allow members to join the Federal Employee Health Benefits plan.
State of play: House Republicans' conservative wing is lining up against the bill, which they say is over-stuffed with legislative hobby horses. Some are singling out the pay raise in their condemnations.
Some of that opposition has been driven by billionaire Elon Musk, a close confidante of President-elect Trump, publicly criticizing the bill.
But it's not just the GOP's right flank, according to the House Republican who spoke on the condition of anonymity, who said there is some opposition "from every corner" and that the bill "is on thin ice."
Swing-district Rep. Zach Nunn (R-Iowa) told Axios he is still considering the bill, but: "I have opposed stock trades, I have opposed benefits for members ... so this kind of falls in that whole category."
Zoom in: Rep. Jared Golden (D-Maine), one of the Democrats' most politically endangered members, said he will oppose the bill if the pay raise and ACA provisions are included.
Rep. Marie Gluesenkamp Perez (D-Wash.), Golden's fellow co-chair of the centrist Blue Dog Coalition, called for leadership to "remove this [COLA] provision" in a statement shared with Axios.
"It shouldn't be in there," said Rep. Jared Moskowitz (D-Fla.) – though he signaled he will vote for the bill because of disaster aid funding.
Former House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.), a longtime champion of raising congressional pay, acknowledged that Democrats "are not happy in some instances."
By the numbers: The House is likely to vote on the bill under a process that requires a two-thirds majority – roughly 290 votes – to pass legislation.
That means it would need virtually all House Democrats and around half of Republicans.
Democratic leadership is supportive of the bill, with a Democratic leadership aide stressing in a statement to Axios that the ACA provision was the result of a "bipartisan negotiation."
What we're hearing: Democratic leadership is advising members on how to message their vote for the bill to counter public blowback to the provisions, according to multiple lawmakers familiar with the matter.
House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) "is being very clear that we need to point out, first of all, it's a Republican bill ... [and] it's complying with existing law rather than voting for an affirmative pay raise," said one senior House Democrat.
Jeffries told Axios in a statement: "The legislation complies with existing law as set forth in the Ethics Reform Act of 1989."
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) told Axios when asked about the provisions: "I mean, this is a Republican majority-run [bill], so these are what Republicans are putting on the floor."
The other side: The pay raise is "an unfair burden to many members and their families," said Rep. John Duarte (R-Calif.), who noted that he lost reelection and thus won't benefit from the pay raise.
Several Democrats similarly argued that the COLA provision lowers the barrier of congressional service to those without independent wealth.
Some also argued that the ACA provision puts them on even footing with the rest of the federal workforce, which isn't forced to use the ACA.
One House Democrat told Axios: "It really doesn't sell that you believe in the program if you have to force people to be on it ... it's a bad look."
The House Ethics Committee has voted to release its report into former Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.) by the end of the year despite initially blocking it from being shared publicly, a source familiar with the matter told Axios.
Why it matters: The release of what is widely expected to be a damning report, first reported by CNN and The New York Times, could challenge future plans Gaetz may have to pursue public office.
It is also a break in precedent for the panel, which tends to close its investigations into members who resign from public office.
Gaetz blasted the news of the report's anticipated release, posting on X on Wednesday that he never faced charges and was unable to face his accusers.
Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) is charting a new, more detached course for working her will on the Democratic caucus she once ruled with an iron fist, numerous lawmakers familiar with the matter tell Axios.
Why it matters: Pelosi's colleagues described a laissez faire approach to backing candidates in committee leadership elections that gives House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) space to settle into his role.
During her reign, Pelosi "would actively have her hands on these races" and would "prevent them from even happening" in some cases, said one veteran House Democrat.
"That's not what happened here. I think it is a different model," the lawmaker added.
"If folks are looking for this narrative that Nancy Pelosi was behind the curtain orchestrating [things], I don't think that happened," said Rep. Jared Huffman (D-Calif.).
Huffman was elected ranking member of the Natural Resources Committee – though his one rival, Rep. Melanie Stansbury (D-N.M.), dropped out before the vote.
Rep. Jim Costa (D-Calif.), another Pelosi-backed Californian, lost to Rep. Angie Craig (D-Minn.) in the race to lead the Agriculture Committee.
Zoom in: Pelosi was physically absent from the elections due to a hip replacement surgery she received in Germany over the weekend after a fall during a congressional trip.
Still, former House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.), Pelosi's longtime deputy, said in a speech supporting Costa that he spoke for the former speaker as well, multiple lawmakers in the room told Axios.
What they're saying: Huffman told Axios after the elections that he and others have gone to Pelosi "for her counsel," but that her role as a booster largely ended with her encouraging candidates to run.
Rep. Greg Meeks (D-N.Y.), who spoke on behalf of Connolly, said of Pelosi's support for the Virginian: "I don't think it was a factor."
"I mean, it's a good factor when anybody plays a role. But, look, you heard Steny in another race say that the speaker emerita was [supporting Costa], and that was a different result," he added.
An Ocasio-Cortez ally told Axios they "haven't heard people talking so much" about Pelosi's role and that the frustration in AOC's camp is focused on certain other top House Democrats who backed Connolly.
Between the lines: Pelosi did some campaigning for her candidates, as Axios has reported. But numerous House Democrats said Tuesday that activity appeared to be fairly limited and fell short of a true whip operation.
"As one of her strong supporters, she never said anything to me," said Rep. Emanuel Cleaver (D-Mo.), positing that there were "some overstatements about ... this theory [that] she had to have her hands in some of this."
Said a senior House Democrat: "I did not have a conversation with the former speaker at all, and ... if she was a part of it, I wasn't aware of it."
Another senior House Democrat told Axios they "didn't hear about any calls," and, noting Pelosi's hip replacement surgery, said that "of course she was not in much of a position to make calls the last week."
Yes, but: Rep. Don Beyer (D-Va.), a vocal Connolly ally, argued Pelosi's backing of Connolly still "definitely helped" him consolidate support.
"And [Hoyer] too," he said. "Two very respected people who have been in leadership for 20-plus years."
Congressional leaders Tuesday unveiled legislation to keep the government funded until March 14, unleashing a mad dash to pass the bill by the end of the week.
Why it matters: House Speaker Mike Johnson's (R-La.) next challenge is to find a way to ram the bill through the chamber while facing heat from his right flank over his handling of the government funding negotiations.
The bill includes around $100 billion in disaster relief, a one-year extension of the farm bill and provisions restricting U.S. investments in China.
It also includes a provision that would allow the NFL's Washington Commanders to return to the RFK Stadium site, as well as sweeping health care reforms, the details of which we reported earlier Tuesday.
The stopgap bill sets up a government funding fight right at the end of President-elect Trump's first 100 days in office, adding to an already-full plate awaiting lawmakers next year.
The big picture: The package includes wins for both Republicans and Democrats.
The mid-March end date for the short-term bill gives Republicans the opportunity to control funding levels for the second half of fiscal 2025.
The billions in disaster relief is a win for Democrats and Republicans in states affected by hurricanes this year — President Biden submitted a request for the funding last month. The package also includes $10 billion in economic aid for farmers.
The restrictions on investments in China are a bipartisan win, and all four corners of congressional leadership wanted to see it make the funding bill. It was pulled out of the year-end defense authorization package last week.
The bottom line: Time is running short. Current funding runs through Dec. 20.
House Democrats on Tuesday elected Rep. Gerry Connolly (D-Va.) as the ranking member of the House Oversight Committee, according to multiple lawmakers familiar with the matter.
Ocasio-Cortez, one of House Democrats' most high-profile members, also lost a vote of the House Democratic Steering and Policy Committee on Monday.
Driving the news: Connolly defeated Ocasio-Cortez 131-84, lawmakers told Axios.
He had the backing of several veteran lawmakers, including former Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.).
The role came open after current Oversight ranking member Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) opted to run for the top Democratic spot on the Judiciary Committee.
What we're hearing: Connolly hinged his case on experience and his political ability, including arguing that he helped make Virginia a blue state, according to multiple lawmakers who heard his pitch.
"He's been the ranking member-in-waiting," is how Rep. Emanuel Cleaver (D-Mo.), who supported Connolly, summed up the Virginian's case.
Ocasio-Cortez emphasized her far-reaching public platform, her ability to communicate and her energetic support for colleagues in recent congressional elections, lawmakers said.
Between the lines: Lawmakers who supported Connolly acknowledged that his relative seniority over Ocasio-Cortez played a big role — as did his Steering Committee victory the day earlier.
"It's been 10 years since we resisted a Steering Committee recommendation," noted Rep. Don Beyer (D-Va.), a staunch Connolly ally.
The full caucus voted in 2014 to shrug off steering's recommendation that Rep. Anna Eshoo (D-Calif.) lead the Energy and Commerce Committee and elected Rep. Frank Pallone (D-N.J.) instead.
Zoom in: One issue Ocasio-Cortez had to confront was her past support for primary challengers to incumbent House Democrats — a sore subject for many lawmakers.
She was pressed on the issue in Monday's Steering and Policy Committee meeting, according to one House Democrat, who said she pledged not to continue the practice.
"She rattled off all the stats: 'I've raised over a million dollars for members, I've paid all my [DCCC] dues, I was one of the most active surrogates for the Biden and Harris campaigns,'" the lawmaker said.
The other side: "I'm disappointed. I know Gerry will do a great job. But there's no substitute for having someone in that position that literally has millions of Americans following her" on social media, said Rep. Becca Balint (D-Vt.), an Ocasio-Cortez ally.
"I think that the seniority issue in this building gets in the way. Our people back home, they don't care about seniority," Balint added.
Both candidates' supporters predicted that Ocasio-Cortez would be elevated to a leadership role in the not-so-distant future.
The bottom line: Connolly's trademark vigor made colleagues comfortable that he could take on the Trump administration despite his age and recent cancer diagnosis, multiple lawmakers told Axios.
Said Connolly: "We're looking at capability, we're not looking at age, is somebody capable, irrespective of how old they are and if they bring energy and enthusiasm."
"Gerry's a young 74, cancer notwithstanding," said Beyer.
Editor's note: This story has been updated with additional reporting.
House Democrats' Steering and Policy Committee voted to recommend Rep. Gerry Connolly (D-Va.) as ranking member of the House Oversight Committee, several sources familiar with the vote told Axios.
Why it matters: It's a huge blow to Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's (D-N.Y.) hopes of leading the high-profile panel, though the full Democratic caucus still has to vote to approve steering's pick.
It is rare for the caucus to buck the suggestion of steering – which is closely aligned with Democratic leadership – but it has happened before.
What we're hearing: Connolly defeated Ocasio-Cortez 34 to 27 on Monday, according to multiple lawmakers present.
Ocasio-Cortez said after the vote that she will continue to contest the role when it goes to a vote of the full caucus.
Zoom out: The battle between Ocasio-Cortez, 35, and Connolly, 74, came as several committee ranking members have fallen to challenges from relatively younger colleagues.
On Monday, Rep. Angie Craig (D-Minn.), 52, defeated 79-year-old Agriculture Committee ranking member David Scott (D-Ga.) and Rep. Jim Costa (D-Calif.), 72, to lead the Agriculture panel.
What they're saying: Rep. Don Beyer (D-Va.), a Connolly ally, acknowledged Connolly's greater seniority likely played a role in his win but argued "it wasn't just that."
"Everyone sort of made the case that they would be the best to help change the message across the country. ... He's a very good communicator," said Beyer.
One House Democrat aligned with Ocasio-Cortez told Axios that steering is "made up of the most senior members," making it not her most receptive venue.
What to watch: Lawmakers said there is still a chance for the caucus to reject steering's recommendation, with Beyer acknowledging the vote was "really just advisory ... we're not the final decider."
There is precedent: The full caucus voted in 2014 to shrug off steering's recommendation that Rep. Anna Eshoo (D-Calif.) lead the Energy and Commerce Committee and elected Rep. Frank Pallone (D-N.J.) instead.
"The majority of votes are in the caucus. We're somewhere between 50 and 70 in [steering], but then it's going to move up to a much larger 215," said Rep. Marcy Kaptur (D-Ohio). "The numbers could move. They all have a chance."
Said the Ocasio-Cortez ally: "She can win tomorrow."
