A group of House Republicans are emerging as frequent co-sponsors of legislation to bring President-elect Trump's vision of an American empire to fruition.

Why it matters: This group spans the House Republican conference's ideological spectrum, from some of its most moderate members to its most right-wing.

• "People who were snickering or laughing about it when it was first brought up are starting to actually realize it's a legitimate issue," said centrist Rep. Mike Lawler (R-N.Y.).
• "This is real," said Rep. Andy Ogles (R-Tenn.), a member of the right-wing Freedom Caucus. "There are going to be some serious conversations."

State of play: A trio of House GOP bills would codify each one of Trump's proposed moves to either expand the U.S.'s territory or its international influence.

• Rep. Dusty Johnson (R-S.D.) has introduced legislation that would allow Trump to enter into negotiations with Panama to try to reassert U.S. control over the Panama Canal.
• Ogles has introduced a similar bill to authorize negotiations with Denmark about purchasing Greenland.
• Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) has introduced a bill that would change the name of the Gulf of Mexico to the "Gulf of America" on official maps and documents.

By the numbers: Each bill has between 10 and 15 co-sponsors, with a considerable amount of overlap.

• Reps. Troy Nehls (R-Texas), Mike Collins (R-Ga.), Dan Crenshaw (R-Texas), Claudia Tenney (R-N.Y.) and Neal Dunn (R-Fla.) are each co-sponsoring two of the bills.
• Lawler and Reps. Mike Rulli (R-Ohio), Randy Weber (R-Texas), Barry Moore (R-Ala.) and Brian Babin (R-Texas) are co-sponsoring all three.

What they're saying: Several of the lawmakers who have either introduced or co-sponsored legislation told Axios that a desire to counter China's international influence is at the heart of the effort.

• "We've been talking on the China Committee about ... China's growing influence on infrastructure across the globe, and I think the Panama Canal is hugely important to America," said Dusty Johnson.
• Lawler also cited rare earth minerals and Arctic waterways as key factors in the push to acquire Greenland, saying Trump is "right in raising these as actual issues of national security and ... economic security."

Zoom in: Some of the more right-wing lawmakers involved in these bills pushed back on the notion that they run counter to a growing strain of anti-interventionism within the MAGA movement.

• "'America First' is, simply stated: When you have a foreign adversary who arguably is our greatest existential threat — meaning China — when they're making moves towards Greenland, we can't just sit idly by," said Ogles.
• "This is literally in our backyard, front yard, however you want to look at it," Ogles said.
• Babin noted that the U.S. controlled the Panama Canal until the 1970s: "This is not intervention. This is not adventurism. This is a U.S.-built canal. There wasn't even a Panama. That was part of Colombia."

House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) is staring down surprise and frustration from lawmakers in both parties for removing Rep. Mike Turner (R-Ohio) as chair of the House Intelligence Committee.

Why it matters: The ouster of Turner, a staunch foreign policy hawk and defender of the intelligence community, was a blow to the large bipartisan bloc of national security-minded lawmakers in Congress.

• Turner's replacement is Rep. Rick Crawford (R-Ark.), who is closer to MAGA world on issues like Ukraine, Axios' Hans Nichols reported.

Driving the news: Johnson confirmed Wednesday that Turner, who was appointed to his role by former House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) in 2022, would not be reappointed to lead the Intelligence panel.

• "This is not a President Trump decision. This is a House decision, and this is no slight whatsoever to our outgoing chairman. He did a great job," Johnson told reporters.
• "It's a new Congress. We just need fresh horses in some of these places, but I'm a Mike Turner fan. He's done a great job. He performed valiantly in a difficult time under difficult circumstances," he added.
• Turner was seen by some House Republicans as too close to the intel community, and he angered GOP colleagues with an alarming statement last year warning of a "serious national security threat."

What they're saying: Rep. Dan Crenshaw (R-Texas), a hawkish Intelligence Committee member, told reporters "we all have questions and concerns" and that Turner's removal "kind of came out of nowhere."

• "McCarthy spent a lot of political capital right-sizing and fixing that committee so that it would be what it needed to be. And Johnson, it's not really clear what his plan is," Crenshaw added.
• Rep. Don Bacon (R-Neb.), another hawk, told Axios "it divides the conference, and I don't think that's good," adding that "most of us agree" with Turner on issues like Ukraine and intelligence collection.
• "I'm not happy with the decision. I think the vast majority of us are not happy with the decision," said another House Republican who spoke on the condition of anonymity.

Zoom in: Despite Johnson's denials, several House Republicans pushed the theory that the right-wing House Freedom Caucus pressed President-elect Trump's team to demand Turner's ouster.

• The House Republican who spoke anonymously said the right-wing group, still smarting over a successful Turner-led push to reauthorize the federal government's spying capabilities, engineered the move.
• "The House Freedom Caucus remembered that, went down to Mar-a-Lago, extracted a pound of flesh from somebody they didn't like," they said. The right-wing group met with Trump at his Florida resort last weekend.
• Crenshaw called it a "very believable theory."
• "Rumors are HFC demanded it," offered Bacon, adding that "if the rumors are true, it's offensive."

The other side: Freedom Caucus members pleaded ignorance.

• "He and I had our disagreements. I was surprised ... I was totally taken aback," said Rep. Andy Biggs (R-Ariz.), a leading opponent of federal government surveillance.
• Freedom Caucus chair Andy Harris (R-Md), asked if any of his members pushed for Turner's removal, told Axios: "I don't think so. You'd have to ask them. It's not an issue we bring up."
• Rep. Troy Nehls (R-Texas), a former Freedom Caucus member, told Axios, "I support the speaker's decision as it is his decision to make."

Democrats, meanwhile, are very public about their outrage towards Johnson's move.

• House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) called Turner's removal "unjustified" and said it is "likely being applauded by our adversaries in Russia and China. Shameful."
• "It's very troubling, to put it mildly ... and it's foreboding that they are removing somebody as strong as that for apparently political reasons," said Rep. Jason Crow (D-Colo.), an Intelligence Committee member.

What's next: Crenshaw told reporters that Republicans on the panel plan to meet with Johnson to try to get his explanation for the decision.

• Still, Crenshaw said of Crawford: "I like Rick. He's already CIA subcommittee chair."

The bottom line: "Any time the speaker makes appointments of course you're going to have people who are upset," a senior House Republican told Axios.

• "Mike Turner's well respected among a good cross-section of the conference."

House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) has ousted Rep. Mike Turner (R-Ohio) as the chair of the House Intelligence Committee, multiple GOP sources familiar with the matter confirmed to Axios.

Why it matters: Turner, who was tapped to lead Republicans on the panel by former House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) in 2022, has at times broken with party leadership in a way that angered his GOP colleagues.

• Most notably, he put out a jarring but cryptic statement last February warning of a "serious national security threat" that turned out to be about Russian nuclear anti-satellite weapons.
• One former House Republican said there is a feeling that Turner is "way too intel establishment."

Zoom out: It's the second time in as many days Johnson has removed a Republican from a key panel.

• Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.), the lone House Republican to vote against reelecting Johnson as speaker on Jan. 3, was taken off the Rules Committee — though he left voluntarily.

House Democrats' two largest ideological factions are trying to tamp down their disagreements ahead of President-elect Trump's return to the White House, Axios has learned.

Why it matters: House Democrats see their number one task as taking on Trump and winning back control of Congress in 2026. Everything else, they say, can wait.

• "Across the board, I think all of us in the Democratic Caucus want to focus on taking back the majority," said Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), the former chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus.

What we're hearing: Members of both the Progressive Caucus and the center-left New Democrat Coalition — which each contain roughly 100 of the 215 House Democrats, with some overlap — confirmed the talks to Axios.

• "Those conversations are starting," a Progressive Caucus member, speaking on the condition of anonymity, told Axios.
• A New Dems member said the focus is on "finding common ground."

What they're saying: Progressive Caucus chair Greg Casar (D-Texas) told Axios there are "conversations being had about trying to make sure that we're unified and cordial and understanding of everybody."

• After Rep. Brad Schneider (D-Ill.) was elected New Dems chair in November, Casar said, "he reached out to me ... about us finding areas of common ground and making sure that we maintain unity across the Dem caucus."
• Schneider told Axios: "We actually had a meeting, and we both said this — we should be talking to each other every day and the best way to avoid unintended circumstances is to communicate with each other."
• "So as long as we're talking and not dropping surprises on the other, I think we'll have a good working relationship," Schneider added.

Zoom in: While Republicans' infighting has generally grabbed the headlines over the last two years, Democrats have grappled with their fair share of internal divisions.

• The Oct. 7 attack and the resulting Israel-Hamas war, in particular, have put House Democrats at odds and resulted in public swiping.
• The party's 2024 election loss has also resulted in a new round of finger-pointing over which ideological flank of the party was to blame.

Zoom in: Separate from these talks, members of both caucuses also described an informal consensus that is emerging around not endorsing primary challengers against incumbent House Democrats.

• Said Jayapal: "We are trying to get to a [Democratic] caucus-wide agreement that we do not weigh in against incumbents and that we focus on open seats."
• Schneider noted the two caucuses "both respected" that practice last cycle and said he "would expect that to continue."

The bottom line: "I think we're all united on ... one purpose, and that's 218 [House seats], the majority," said Schneider.

• "We need to keep the eyes on that. I want to see Hakeem Jeffries as speaker. I want to see Democrats with gavels in their hands."

House Democrats are warning Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) that tying federal wildfire relief for California to the debt limit could set a new precedent that would come back to bite Republicans.

Why it matters: Disaster prone red states like Florida and Louisiana — Johnson's home state — could face a similar squeeze from Democrats if they retake the House, lawmakers told Axios.

• "This place is like high school, it's tit for tat when one side breaks a norm. The other side is happy to return the favor," said Rep. Jared Moskowitz (D-Fla.), pointing to the removal of members from committees as an example.
• If Johnson conditions the aid, Moskowitz said, "California's our largest delegation. You think they're going to forget about that?"

Driving the news: Johnson told reporters Monday that, "I think that there should probably be conditions on that aid. That's my personal view."

• "We'll see what the consensus is. I haven't had a chance to socialize that with any of the members over the weekend, because we've all been very busy. But it will be part of the discussion for sure," he said.
• It's not clear yet whether the idea has full support among Republicans, with centrist Rep. Mike Lawler (R-N.Y.) telling Axios "that process will play itself out."
• "We want to provide relief to Americans who were impacted by natural disasters of any kind," he said, but California's "disastrous policy decisions … will be part of a discussion."

What they're saying: "I just think it's a really bad precedent, and, yeah, I do think it could have slingshot effects," Rep. Ami Bera (D-Calif.) told Axios in a brief interview at the Capitol.

• "Whether it's wildfires in CA, or hurricanes and tornadoes in Louisiana, we should should never condition aid to disaster victims," Rep. Robert Garcia (D-Calif.) told Axios, also warning that the move would set a "really dangerous precedent."
• House Democratic Caucus Chair Pete Aguilar (D-Calif.) said conditioning aid would be "crazy and ridiculous" and would "completely upend Congress."

Between the lines: Lawmakers in both parties told Axios that Johnson's gambit is a clear acknowledgement that both disaster aid and the debt ceiling will require Democratic votes to pass.

• Republicans have floated including a debt ceiling increase in the massive party-line fiscal bill they're planning, but that risks touching off a right-wing revolt.
• "It's not the issue of conditioning, it's the issue of how do we get it done," said Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart (R-Fla.), a top House Appropriations Committee member who acknowledged both measures will "probably" need bipartisan support.

Zoom in: Rep. Brad Sherman (D-Calif.), whose district has been directly hit by the wildfires, said it would "obviously be outrageous and unthinkable for Republicans to react differently to a disaster based upon how people voted."

• Sherman said he is "not for" conditioning future aid to red states on a partisan objective — offering an immigration reform package as an example.
• But "if Democrats tied Louisiana relief to making sure Social Security stayed solvent, that's a bipartisan objective," he said.
• The idea of conditioning aid may also lack universal GOP support, with Rep. Young Kim (R-Calif.) telling Axios in a statement: "If aid is needed, we need to deliver."

The bottom line: "People have lost their lives, homes, and livelihoods," said Rep. Sydney Kamlager-Dove (D-Calif.), whose district has also been impacted by the wildfires.

• "I have zero tolerance for partisan bullsh*t right now."

A non-profit closely aligned with House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) is preparing its first major investment in the 2026 election with a campaign aimed at dinging Republicans on the economy.

Why it matters: The effort comes as President-elect Trump and congressional Republicans are preparing a hulking fiscal policy package that could define the 119th Congress.

• Jeffries has already started to message against the legislation, labeling it the "GOP tax scam part two" at a press conference last week.

Driving the news: House Majority Forward, the issue advocacy arm of House Majority PAC, is launching a $10 million "economic accountability" campaign.

• The campaign will include TV and digital ads to "hold Republicans accountable for refusing to lower costs," according to a press release first shared with Axios.
• It will also involve research and polling to "develop a deeper understanding of how Republican policies are hurting American wallets."
• HMF president Mike Smith said: "Speaker Mike Johnson and House Republicans have only just been sworn in, but they're already breaking their promises by failing to lower costs. It's time to stop playing games, and start working for the American people."

Between the lines: The plan represents something of a shift in strategy for Democrats after an abortion-centered message of "freedom" failed to carry them to victory last year.

• Top Democrats told Axios in the aftermath of the Nov. 5 election that a difficult political environment driven by years of inflation ultimately doomed Vice President Harris.
• Trump successfully pitched himself as a change candidate, promising to upend the national and global economic order with an agenda of immigration restrictions, trade barriers and dismantling regulations.

The other side: "The failed Biden administration and their allies in Congress decimated our economy with a far-left agenda of reckless spending and extreme America-last policies," said Courtney Parella, a spokesperson for GOP-aligned non-profit American Action Network.

• "That's why Americans chose and trust Republican leadership — to restore the economy, lower costs, and deliver for families," she said.

President-elect Trump has inspired Republican members of Congress to introduce a bill that would allow the federal government to take steps to repurchase the Panama Canal.

Why it matters: It's the second time this week GOP lawmakers have rushed to propose legislation that would codify Trump's vision for a new era of American expansionism.

• Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) said Tuesday she plans to introduce a bill that would rename the Gulf of Mexico the "Gulf of America."

Driving the news: Rep. Dusty Johnson (R-S.D.), the chair of the pragmatist Republican Main Street Caucus, introduced the two-page Panama Canal Repurchase Act on Thursday.

• The bill authorizes the president and secretary of state to "initiate and conduct negotiations with appropriate counterparts" in Panama on buying back the canal.
• The U.S. controlled the canal from its construction in 1914 until 1977, when then-President Carter turned over to Panama.

By the numbers: Johnson's legislation has 15 GOP co-sponsors, ranging from relative centrists like Rep. Mike Lawler (R-N.Y.) to right-wing hardliners like Rep. Andrew Clyde (R-Ga.).

• It does not yet have any bipartisan support, though some Democrats have expressed openness to the idea of reasserting U.S. influence over the canal to counter China.
• Trump has also proposed purchasing Greenland and, more jokingly, annexing Canada, and he has not ruled out the use of military force to achieve the former.

Some moderate House Democrats are keeping the door open to supporting the massive tax, border and energy package President-elect Trump and Republicans are concocting — if the price is right.

Why it matters: House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) has virtually no room for error to pass the bill along party lines, and some of his right-wing hardliners are harshly conditioning their votes.

• "One of several, for me, 'bright lines,' 'red lines,' however you want to say it, is deficit reduction," Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas) told reporters on Thursday.
• That could be a heavy lift with Republicans planning trillions in tax cut extensions, on top of funding for things like enhanced border security.

What we're hearing: The main way Republicans could try to entice some breakaway Democratic support is through raising the $10,000 cap on the state and local tax (SALT) deduction.

• That would put money directly into the pockets of suburbanites in high-tax blue states like California, New York and New Jersey.
• "I'm not going to say what I will support or not support until I see the specifics, but I think SALT is critically important ... and this is a huge opportunity to bring SALT back fully," said Rep. Josh Gottheimer (D-N.J.).
• Rep. George Latimer (D-N.Y.) told Axios, "Obviously I like full SALT restoration, but let's see where the negotiations take us. ... The doors are open for whatever helps."

State of play: Some of the House GOP's most ardent advocates for SALT, like Rep. Mike Lawler (R-N.Y.), are pushing hard to include a generous provision in the bill and are going to Mar-a-Lago this weekend to make their case.

• Trump said on the 2024 campaign trail he would reverse the SALT cap that was part of the 2017 tax bill he signed into law.
• But the high price tag of that policy could make it a tough sell for deficit hawks like Roy, who told reporters, "Obviously, if you significantly lift or eliminate the cap, there's a fairly significant impact in terms of revenues."

The intrigue: Some of the other centrist Democrats who may be inclined to give the package a fair look would be turned off by the inclusion of a strong SALT provision.

• Rep. Jared Golden (D-Maine), who represents a working-class, rural district, told Axios he would support the bill "if there's stuff in there that's good for Maine or that I like."
• But, he added, "I don't like SALT. It's just a huge giveaway to the top 10%, and I care about the deficit. So that's a bad start."

Reality check: Extending the Trump tax cuts could ultimately be a bridge too far for most Democrats, with House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) calling the package the "GOP tax scam part two" at a press conference on Wednesday.

• "Wasting trillions of dollars on tax giveaways to the super-wealthy is offensive on its face," said centrist Rep. Greg Landsman (D-Ohio).
• Rep. Tom Suozzi (D-N.Y.) said it would be "very hard to support a tax bill that reduces corporate taxes, that doesn't put the top rate back to where it was."

Johnson, asked by Axios if he is willing to work with Democrats on the legislation, said: "We welcome all Democrats to vote for a good package. This is going to be great legislation. It's an America First agenda, but it follows common sense."

• Trump appears to be willing to take Democratic input: Sen. John Fetterman (D-Pa.) told reporters Thursday he plans to make a trek to Mar-a-Lago this weekend.

The bottom line: Even skeptical Democrats say they are ready to talk if things fall apart for Johnson and he decides to engage with them.

• "They're going to want to do this on their own," said Landsman. "If they can't because of the slim majority, obviously they're going to need our help. And that's when the bipartisan magic happens."

Fresh off their bruising 2024 losses, Democrats seem to more willing to engage with Republican legislation on issues like immigration and Israel.

Why it matters: The dynamic is putting some "messaging bills" that House Republicans passed in the previous Congress on a path to actually becoming law.

• The Laken Riley Act is picking up votes from Senate Democrats needed to overcome the 60-vote filibuster threshold.
• The bill would require the detention of undocumented immigrants arrested on theft-related charges and allow states to sue the federal government over crimes committed by immigrants.
• The legislation received 48 Democratic votes in the House on Wednesday, up from 37 when it was voted on last year. Seven Democrats who previously voted against it flipped to voting for it this week.

What they're saying: "You know, some of us have been talking about this for years," Rep. Henry Cuellar (D-Texas) told Axios. He's a centrist, border-district Democrat who voted both times for the bill.

• "I think after people saw what happened with the election, you definitely are seeing more people realize that what happens at the border is very important to the voters," Cuellar said.
• Sen. John Fetterman (D-Pa.), who is co-sponsoring the bill in the Senate, said Wednesday in a Fox News interview that if the bill can't get the seven Democratic votes it needs to pass the Senate, "that's a reason why we lost."

Yes, but: The election results were not the only factor that drove increased Democratic support for the bill.

• One House Democrat, speaking on the condition of anonymity, said some votes flipped because it "was not the same bill as last year" with the removal of language hammering the Biden administration for its immigration policy.
• Rep. Brendan Boyle (D-Pa.), a staunch Biden ally, cited that as the reason for him changing his vote.
• Still, the lawmaker who spoke anonymously also acknowledged: "Clearly the election will have some impact on how members see the world."

Zoom in: That dynamic could play out with a bill to sanction the International Criminal Court for issuing arrest warrants against Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu and Defense Minister Yoav Gallant.

• Several House Democrats told Axios it is possible the bill could get more Democratic votes than the 42 it received when it passed the House last June.
• Rep. Jared Moskowitz (D-Fla.) said there are "similar learning lessons for the Democratic Party" with each bill, noting that Democrats took a beating on Israel last year.
• "I think there will be Democrats that will look at it differently now," he said. "If you're asking people to take a side between Israel and the ICC, I think there will be more people than maybe previously that will vote for this."

The bottom line: "These message bills are hard, because the people at home believe the title and don't understand what's in them," said one senior House Democrat.

• "These are wedge issues, and we've got to really think about them ... it's all very complicated."

House Republicans are already laying down potential dealbreakers for the massive fiscal legislation President-elect Trump and House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) are planning.

Why it matters: The chamber is set to have a roughly two-vote majority when the package is voted on, meaning just a handful of GOP defections could sink the entire initiative.

• Republican factions — both in the House and Senate — are already at each others' throats on whether the package should consist of one bill or two, with Trump wavering on the topic.

State of play: Republican leadership could run into an issue with its fiscally conservative wing if it tries to advance one sprawling bill that includes a measure to raise the debt ceiling.

• "I heard that there are three people that will not vote for a debt ceiling lift, which already kills the bill," said Rep. Rich McCormick (R-Ga.).
• Two House Republicans — Reps. Andy Biggs of Arizona and Tim Burchett of Tennessee — have never voted to increase the debt ceiling.

Zoom in: The overall price tag of the measure could also create a dilemma for deficit hawks.

• The bill is set to include an extension of Trump's 2017 tax cuts that could cost as much as $5 trillion over 10 years, in addition to funding for border security and an immigration crackdown.
• It will also likely include spending cuts, but the kind of discretionary cuts that Republicans have been floating may amount to peanuts compared to the debt and deficit implications of the package.

What they're saying: "I'm not going to say I'm going to create a 'red line' per se, but in general I came up here to cut spending. That's my whole personal goal, to right-size government," said Rep. Eric Burlison (R-Mo.).

• Burlison said Republicans have historically been "bad at" pairing meaningful spending reductions with their tax cuts.
• "Everybody has something that somebody's whispering in their ear that they need for [their district], so spending is always a hang-up for Congress and we have never, ever been able to bring that in," said McCormick.

Zoom out: It's not just the GOP's right flank that leadership has to worry about.

• Rep. Mike Lawler (R-N.Y.) told reporters Tuesday he's "been very clear from the start that I will not support a tax bill that does not lift the cap" on the state and local tax deduction.
• That's a provision several blue-state Republicans have pushed for — even though it is unpopular with many Republican lawmakers.
• Lifting the SALT cap would likely also add hundreds of billions to the deficit, which could further fuel the concerns of fiscal conservatives.

What's next: Trump is set to meet with several factions of House Republican lawmakers to try to bridge the divide among them.

• That includes those Republicans pushing to increase the SALT cap, as well as GOP committee leaders and members of the right-wing House Freedom Caucus.

The 119th House passed its first bill of 2025 Tuesday: The Laken Riley Act, which would require the detention of undocumented immigrants arrested for certain non-violent crimes such as theft.

Why it matters: It's a sign of just how central immigration and border security will be for Republicans under the incoming Trump administration.

• The party spent the last four years railing against what they said was the Biden administration's dereliction on border security.

Driving the news: The bill — named for a 22-year-old nursing student who was killed on the University of Georgia campus last year — passed 264-159, with 48 Democrats siding with Republicans in voting for it

• The bill was one of a dozen pieces of legislation listed in the House GOP's rules package that passed last week, allowing it to be voted on under a streamlined process.
• The House previously passed the bill last March, with 37 Democrats voting in favor of it, but it did not get a vote in the then-Democratic Senate.
• Several Democrats who previously opposed the bill, including several committee ranking members and Rep. Lucy McBath (D-Ga.), who represents a district not far from UGA, voted for it this time around.

Zoom in: Republicans frequently pointed to Riley's murder at the hands of an undocumented immigrant who had previously been arrested on theft-related charges as evidence of the need for stronger border policies.

• Now Republicans control the Senate and plan to hold a vote on the bill, Axios' Stephen Neukam and Stef Kight reported.
• It's likely to get some Democratic support in the Senate, though it may not be enough to clear the chamber's 60-vote threshold.

The other side: Democratic leadership opposed the bill but did not formally whip against it, according to a notice sent out by House Minority Whip Katherine Clark's (D-Mass.) office.

• "The policies in this bill would ratchet up the number of mandatory detentions without increasing funding to carry them out," the whip notice said.
• It also argued that the bill would give conservative state attorneys general greater ability to block federal border policy.

Editor's note: This story has been updated with additional reporting.

Coming out of the House chamber Monday after certifying President-elect Trump's 2024 victory, Democrats argued that their party set an example by allowing the process to go smoothly and peacefully.

Why it matters: The uneventful 30-minute proceedings reversed a precedent in recent election cycles of members of Congress trying to object to elector slates for the opposing party's presidential candidate.

• In 2017, several House Democrats tried unsuccessfully to object to Trump's electors.
• In 2021, a much more organized effort to overturn the election resulted in votes on certifying the Arizona and Pennsylvania electors — and the deadly riot targeting the U.S. Capitol.

What they're saying: "Obviously there was a huge difference between this Jan. 6 and the other Jan. 6 ... We hope that'll be a good example for years to come," said Rep. Don Beyer (D-Va.).

• House Administration Committee ranking member Joe Morelle (D-N.Y.) said the public should "take note: This is how the peaceful transfer of power has happened for 250 years."
• "The anomaly of the last four years cannot be repeated," Morelle said, adding that Democrats "respect the democratic institutions even when they're not in our favor."
• Said Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.): "We were acting as Constitutional patriots, and this is exactly what the peaceful transfer of power should look like."

What we're hearing: Despite most Democrats echoing that line, Rep. Debbie Dingell (D-Mich.), the chair of the Democratic Policy and Communications Committee, stressed that the messaging did not come from leadership.

• "Most of us are feeling the same way. We're all talking to each other, there's a lot of 'peaceful transfer,' and 'it's our job to make sure the American people see.'"
• "There's nobody saying [to members], 'Be on that same page,'" she added.

Between the lines: Monday's proceedings were an intensely bitter pill for Democrats to swallow, with Vice President Harris — Democrats' candidate against Trump — charged with certifying her opponent's victory.

• Rep. Norma Torres (D-Calif.) said her wish is that Democrats set a precedent, but she told Axios she is "not that hopeful, even though ... I try to have a glass that is half full."
• "Seeing the attitudes of Republicans sitting across the aisle from me, smirking — this was a serious ceremony. They were acting like juveniles," she added, arguing Republicans were "rewarded for their bad behavior" with their election win.

The other side: Several Republicans who spoke to Axios pointed to Democrats objecting to Trump's 2016 electors and former President Bush's in 2004 — with some also arguing that election objections aren't necessarily a negative thing.

• Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) said members of Congress "should have the right to object. We should have the right to look into every part of an election."
• "The right exists. It's there. Who am I to take it away," said Rep. Andrew Clyde (R-Ga.).

For members of Congress who trudged through a snowstorm to certify President-elect Trump's victory in the Electoral College, Jan. 6, 2025 was almost bizarre in its uneventfulness.

Why it matters: Just four years ago today, former Vice President Pence had to be rushed to a secure location when the Jan. 6 Capitol riot interrupted the Electoral College certification for President-elect Biden.

That was in stark contrast with Monday's joint session, in which tellers ran swiftly through each elector slate.

• Vice President Harris — who presided over the meeting — "certified her own defeat, and the victory of her opponent who said nasty things about her," Rep. Jimmy Gomez (D-Calif.) told Axios.
• Harris having to certify Trump's victory after he "nearly stole our democracy four years ago was "the part that is most painful to me," said Rep. Norma Torres (D-Calif.).
• Lawmakers applauded when electors were announced for their respective candidates, but when Harris announced Trump's victory, both sides gave a standing ovation.

Driving the news: Unlike in 2021, when Congress reconvened following the riot and certified President Biden's victory after midnight, the joint session on Monday concluded after just a half hour.

• No lawmakers stood up to try to object to any of the elector slates, though the new Electoral Count Reform Act passed in 2022 would have made that difficult to do anyway.
• Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) told reporters he felt the applause for a traditionally perfunctory, non-partisan process was misplaced: "I didn't really understand that on either side of the aisle … We were not on the floor of our party conventions."

Between the lines: Rep. Dan Newhouse (R-Wash.), one of two sitting House Republicans who voted to impeach Trump over the Capitol riot, told Axios: "See how easy it can be? How much difference four years can be?"

• Newhouse said he has been "watching all the reruns [of Jan. 6] the last few days on TV," saying of Monday's proceedings, "Surreal — I guess that's probably a good term for it."

What they're saying: "We're not fans of Donald Trump, but he won the most votes," Gomez told Axios, saying it was "a little strange on the [House] floor" during the proceedings.

• Rep. Joe Morelle (D-N.Y.), who was one of the tellers, said "it was a little bit to process ... the trauma of four years ago and feel it in a personal way."
• "For the country, it may feel a little surreal that we're back here," Morelle added.

The bottom line: For some Democrats, there was more than a twinge of bitterness about just how smoothly the process went.

• Torres noted the contrast between how fortified the Capitol was on Monday versus four years ago: "I only wish that we would have had the number of security of personnel."

The House voted mostly along party lines Friday to adopt a rules package that protects newly reelected Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) from a potential ouster.

Why it matters: The new rules make it so that a vote on removing the speaker can only be brought if at least nine Republicans support what is called a "motion to vacate."

• That is a significantly higher bar than in the 118th Congress when any single member in either party could force such a motion.
• The tool was used to remove former House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) in October 2023. Johnson faced an unsuccessful ouster attempt in April.

Zoom in: House Democrats have railed against the change, noting that for the first time in U.S. history the minority party would be restricted from introducing a motion to vacate.

• "Instead of electing a Speaker of the House, they have decided to elect a Speaker of the Republican Conference — held hostage by their most extreme members," said House Rules Committee ranking member Jim McGovern (D-Mass.).

Zoom out: The 37-page rules package also formally eliminates the House's Diversity and Inclusion office, a longtime priority of House Republicans.

• It renames the House Oversight and Accountability Committee to the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee — the name it held before Republicans retook the House under President Biden.
• It also renames the Office of Congressional Ethics to the Office of Congressional Conduct, authorizes subpoenas of DOJ officials as part of Republicans' Biden probe and retains the China Select Committee.
• And it tees up votes on a dozen bills related to Israel, border security, transgender participation in sports and proof of citizenship for voting.

Between the lines: After the speaker election, in which Johnson faced a 45-minute standoff with a handful of right-wing defectors, the rules package was changed to include two new provisions.

• One provision restricts the House from holding what are known as "suspension" votes after Wednesdays. It effectively restricts GOP leadership's ability to pass major legislation with help from Democrats.
• The other removes gender-neutral language from the rules — such as changing "child" to "son" and "daughter."

A group of nearly a dozen right-wing House Republicans on Friday released a list of demands they want Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) to fulfill in order to keep the speaker's gavel.

Why it matters: It's enough members to force a vote on removing Johnson later on — meaning the newly reelected speaker has to take them seriously.

• Johnson got his first taste of rebellion Friday as a trio of holdouts nearly derailed his reelection bid — with two relenting only after a 45-minute standoff.
• Now, the right-wing hardliners who voted for him only reluctantly are unveiling a checklist for how he can keep his gavel.

Driving the news: In a letter to their Republican colleagues, 11 members of the House Freedom Caucus board wrote that they voted for Johnson "despite our serious reservations" about his track record.

• The letter includes a list of demands for Johnson, urging him to modify the House calendar to have more days in session and ensure that Republicans' reconciliation package cuts the deficit.
• It also demands votes on border security, spending cuts, reversing Biden administration environmental policies and election reform.
• The letter was led by Rep. Andy Harris (R-Md.), the chair of the right-wing group.

What they're saying: There is always room to negotiate on so-called "leadership" positions under the rules; in the meantime, each one of our election certificates is still equal," the lawmakers wrote.

• "Personalities can be debated later, but right now there is zero room for error on the policies the American people demanded when they voted for President Trump ... We demand the House of Representatives deliver — quickly."

Rep. Mike Johnson (R-La.) was reelected as the speaker of the House on Friday, securing the gavel on the first ballot.

Why it matters: Johnson appeared imperiled as three Republicans initially voted against him — enough to sink him on the first ballot.

• After a roughly 45-minute standoff, Reps. Ralph Norman (R-S.C.) and Keith Self (R-Texas) switched to voting for Johnson, giving him the 218 votes he needed to secure the gavel without a multi-ballot fight.
• Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) was the lone defector, voting for Majority Whip Tom Emmer (R-Minn.), while all Democrats voted for Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.).

Zoom in: Just before the vote began Friday, Johnson released a list of promises around spending cuts in an apparent deal to shore up his reelection.

• He said he will create a working group of "independent experts" to explore spending reforms and release a report, as well as direct committees to "aggressively" review federal funding.
• That was enough to win over roughly a dozen House Republicans who had for weeks refused to commit to voting for him, some of whom waited until the last minute to do so.

Zoom out: The Louisiana Republican, first elevated to the speakership in 2023 after Rep. Kevin McCarthy's (R-Calif.) ouster, has faced growing anger from his right flank throughout his 14-month tenure.

• GOP hardliners have raged at him for working across the aisle to pass government spending and foreign aid bills without demanding stringent spending cuts.
• But President-elect Trump backed Johnson, urging his allies not to tank the vote and potentially imperil Congress' certification of his election victory on Jan. 6.

Between the lines: Self and Norman spoke to Trump during the 45-minute voting interlude, according to both lawmakers and several other sources familiar with the matter.

• They were connected to the incoming president by Rep. Nancy Mace (R-S.C.), who called Trump personally and handed off her phone, the sources told Axios.
• Self declined to divulge details of the conversation other than saying they "discussed how we can advance the Trump agenda" and that he had a separate, one-on-one talk with Trump as well.

What they're saying: The short-lived rebellion against Johnson was seen by some Republicans as simply a play for attention.

• Said one GOP lawmaker shortly before Self and Norman flipped their votes: "They just need five more minutes of fame, it seems like."
• "A couple more tweets, a couple more five-dollar donations ... and we'll bring this thing home," the lawmaker said.

What to watch: Some GOP lawmakers worry that the difficulty Johnson faced in securing reelection is a sign of what is to come over the next two years.

• "I'm hoping that President Trump will lean in on some of these members ... we don't have time to deal with this intransigence," Rep. Mark Alford (R-Mo.) told Axios before the vote was gaveled.

Editor's note: This story has been updated with additional reporting.

The deadly New Year's attacks in New Orleans and Las Vegas have officials in Washington, D.C., on high alert about potential security threats ahead of President-elect Trump's inauguration.

Why it matters: Concerns about a possible wave of nationwide violence come as extraordinary security precautions are already being put in place for both the inauguration and Congress' certification of the 2024 election.

• One senior House Democrat told Axios that this week's attacks have rattled many lawmakers.
• A House Republican said they are "very concerned about security" because "we saw real terrorism this week," noting that a Trump property apparently was targeted in the Las Vegas attack.
• Even before the attacks, some House Democrats said they planned to skip the inauguration out of fear for their safety.

Driving the news: In New Orleans, a man identified as 42-year-old U.S. Army veteran Shamsud-Din-Jabbar allegedly drove his pickup truck onto a sidewalk on crowded Bourbon Street, killing at least 14 people and injuring dozens.

• And in Las Vegas, a Tesla Cybertruck containing fireworks and fuel exploded outside Trump's Las Vegas hotel, killing the driver and injuring seven others.

What they're saying: D.C.'s Metropolitan Police Department said Wednesday that it has "heightened its security posture" in response to the attacks.

• "As we approach upcoming major events in the District of Columbia, MPD will continue working with our local and federal partners to assess potential threats and make any necessary adjustments," the department said in a statement.
• D.C.'s Metro Transit Police also said they've "heightened security," including an "increased police presence" on public transit.

Zoom in: For the first time, the Department of Homeland Security has designated Congress' certification of presidential electors on Jan. 6 as a National Special Security Event — the same level of protection as inaugurations and the Super Bowl.

• It will be the first time since the Capitol riot on Jan. 6, 2021, that Congress meets to certify a presidential election — though, unlike in 2021, there are no serious efforts to try to overturn the election results.
• U.S. Capitol Police Chief Tom Manger told WTOP last month that security for Jan. 6 will be "night and day" from what it was four years ago.
• Fences have already been erected around the Capitol warning would-be trespassers about federal law that prohibits entering restricted grounds.

Both D.C. law enforcement agencies said Thursday there are "no known threats" to events in the city. U.S. Capitol Police said they have "already been ramping up security, as planned, ahead of a busy month."

• A senior House member with knowledge of the security preparations told Axios that the Capitol is "well fortified" and that "frankly, given all the steps we've taken ... we're about as secure as we've ever been."
• Even so, the lawmaker added that "we're obviously monitoring all of this. The violence everywhere is beyond troubling. ... There are ongoing concerns."

Zoom out: The New Year's attacks come amid a period of growing political violence, including a steady years-long rise in threats targeting members of Congress.

• The Jan. 6 attack, the 2021 Good Friday car attack, the assault of Paul Pelosi, a series of raucous Gaza-related protests and the two assassination attempts against Trump have fueled the push for tight security.
• Over Thanksgiving, Trump appointees and lawmakers from New England had their homes targeted by hoax bomb threats.

Go deeper: Congress shaken but not surprised by "unsettling" bomb threats

House Republicans' mainstream wing is warning Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) not to repeat his predecessor's mistake of giving away the store to his right-wing detractors to retain his gavel, Axios has learned.

Why it matters: Johnson is facing roughly a dozen right-wing holdouts on the eve of Friday's speaker election — in which he will only be able to afford a handful of GOP defections.

• Johnson said in a "Fox and Friends" interview Thursday that he has spoken with "every single one" of his detractors and that "we'll be talking about process reforms in the House."
• GOP sources have told Axios that Johnson is willing to make commitments but not formal concessions like rules changes.

What we're hearing: There have been "scores" of "regular" House Republicans warning Johnson even against handshake deals that may put the rest of his conference in a bind, four House Republicans familiar with the outreach told Axios.

• "There are significant communications," said one of the lawmakers, who told Axios that these GOP moderates are warning Johnson: "Don't do what [former Speaker Kevin] McCarthy did."
• "Don't give promises upon which you can't deliver. Don't give promises that require us to do things that we don't want to do, that are beyond reasonable," the lawmaker said.
• Another told Axios: "You cannot trust these guys who undermine us at every point. They ask for first base, the speaker gives it to them, and they ask for second base. ... Don't cater to [them]."

Zoom out: In his 15-ballot fight to become speaker in 2023, McCarthy (R-Calif.) cut a deal with his right-wing rebels — including rules changes, plum committee assignments and votes on certain bills — that came back to haunt him.

• The three GOP hardliners he put on the Rules Committee made it difficult to bring bills to the floor, while the lowered motion-to-vacate threshold led to his ouster.
• The leverage the deal gave hardliners also forced the GOP's moderate wing to take difficult votes on the debt ceiling, government spending, social policy and more.

Zoom in: One idea establishment House Republicans find particularly distasteful is making Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas) the chair of the House Rules Committee.

• That is a "very unpopular initiative for many Republicans," the first House Republican told Axios.

Between the lines: These Republicans are confident they won't see a repeat of the much-maligned McCarthy deal.

• "We all trust Johnson won't go that far," said the first House Republican, calling him a "good conservative man whose ideology used to be like Freedom Caucus ... adjacent — now he understands he's got a house to run."
• Johnson "is trusted to do what's needed without going too far," said a third. "If he has to give the sleeves off his vest, most are fine with that."

Editor's note: This story has been updated with additional reporting.

The first roll call will be tense, but House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) has a clear path to winning the speaker election on Friday.

• "I think we get it done on the first round," Johnson told Fox Business on Thursday.

Why it matters: On paper, Johnson has a better outlook than former Speaker Kevin McCarthy did in 2023.

• McCarthy had a four-seat margin in January 2023, and five Republicans were public "no" votes ahead of the speaker election.
• Johnson has a two-seat margin and just one public GOP "no" vote ahead of the election. That's Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.).

"It feels like it's different from two years ago," one House Republican told Axios.

• Johnson's skeptics, the lawmaker said, are "looking for a couple policy accommodations" while McCarthy's "had an ax to grind."
• Case in point: Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.), who tried to oust Johnson last year, said Thursday she'll vote for Johnson and urged others to get on board.

President-elect Trump is also involved. He called one of the holdouts — Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas) — to press him to back Johnson, Punchbowl reported Thursday.

• In 2023, Trump notably intervened after McCarthy had lost several rounds of balloting.
• This time he's twisting arms ahead of the big event.

Zoom in: Mainstream GOP lawmakers have warned Johnson against handshake deals with conservatives, Axios scooped this afternoon.

• "There are significant communications," said one of the lawmakers, who told Axios that these GOP moderates are warning Johnson: "Don't do what [former speaker Kevin] McCarthy did."
• "Don't give promises upon which you can't deliver. Don't give promises that require us to do things that we don't want to do, that are beyond reasonable," the lawmaker said.

Establishment Republicans loathe the idea of making Roy the chair of the House Rules Committee.

• That is a "very unpopular initiative for many Republicans," a House Republican told Axios.

The bottom line: The speaker says he's "open" to some conservative demands.

• The big one: No putting big-ticket bills on the floor under suspension of the rules. Many of those suspension votes were because House GOP leaders surrendered control of the House Rules Committee in January 2023.
• Johnson ran into this buzzsaw several times last year before getting help from Democrats on must-pass bills. Conservatives want this trend to end, boxing in Johnson unless he stuffs Rules with more speaker-friendly votes.
• Democrats seem uninterested in bailing out Johnson — and by extension, Trump, on must-pass bills that can't get by the Freedom Caucus.

House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) floated "process reforms" Thursday as he tries to shore up his bid to retain his gavel on Jan. 3.

Why it matters: Johnson's remarks to Fox News are a sign he is willing to make commitments to his Republican skeptics as they demand he take a harder line on government spending and resist the urge to broker bipartisan compromises.

• "They were upset with how the year-end stuff came to the floor," one House Republican told Axios of the speaker's detractors.
• Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas), one of Johnson's most vocal holdouts, "wants more commitment to member-driven and socialized proposals," the lawmaker said.

What he's saying: Johnson said in a "Fox and Friends" interview that the Friday speaker election is a "numbers game," noting he is set to have a 219-215 majority and will have "a margin of probably two votes."

• Johnson said he has been making calls to the roughly dozen House Republicans who have refused to commit to voting for his reelection.
• "I've talked to every single one of those friends and colleagues over the holidays. We'll be talking about process reforms in the House," he said, without specifying what those changes might be.

State of play: Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) has already pledged to vote for an alternative to Johnson, meaning the speaker likely cannot lose a single additional vote.

• Many members of the right-wing House Freedom Caucus, including chair Andy Harris (R-Md.) and former chair Scott Perry (R-Pa.), have said they are undecided.
• Perry complained to the Philadelphia Inquirer that Johnson "has not been artful" in advancing the "Trump agenda."

Zoom in: Johnson is making the case that, with Republicans set to take control of the Senate and White House, he will have a greater ability to pursue legislation that satisfies his right flank.

• "I think the reason they're all going to vote yes is this: We are shifting into a brand new paradigm. We have unified government that begins tomorrow," Johnson said.
• "We are excited to deliver on the American First agenda. It begins on day one ... tomorrow," he added.
• He and his allies are also warning that a failure to pick the speaker could delay the Jan. 6 certification of President-elect Trump's victory.

Between the lines: Johnson has made one rule change that, much to Democrats' fury, could make it easier for him to focus on internal GOP matters at the expense of bipartisanship.

• The proposed rules package for the 119th Congress makes it so that, rather than any member of either party being able to force a vote on ousting the speaker, only a group of at least nine Republicans can.
• Said House Rules Committee ranking member Jim McGovern (D-Mass.): "Instead of electing a Speaker of the House, they have decided to elect a Speaker of the Republican Conference — held hostage by their most extreme members."

The bottom line: "He will make it," predicted the House Republican who spoke anonymously.