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.

House Democrats are pushing back furiously against a proposed change to House rules that would allow only Republicans to force a vote on removing the speaker of the House.

Why it matters: Top Democrats are arguing the move would inhibit bipartisanship and effectively make House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) answerable only to his members — not the entire House.

• "This makes it clear that they have no intention of working together to find common ground," Rep. Jim McGovern (D-Mass.), the top Democrat on the House Rules Committee, said of the rules change in a statement.
• McGovern added: "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."
• Democrats are likely to follow McGovern's lead and close ranks against the package, a senior House Democrat told Axios.

Driving the news: The 36-page rules package for the 119th Congress, unveiled on Wednesday, raises the threshold to introduce what is called a "motion to vacate" in multiple ways.

• Whereas in the last Congress, any single House member could introduce such a motion, now eight others have to co-sponsor the measure.
• But all nine of those lawmakers have to be members of the majority party — which will be the Republicans in this Congress.
• The rules change is part of a deal struck by House Republicans' internal factions in November as the party renominated Johnson for speaker.

Zoom out: For most of U.S. history, any singular House member in either party has been able to introduce a motion to vacate.

• That changed in 2019, when House Democrats took control of the chamber and made it so that it could only be introduced at the direction of either the House Democratic caucus or the House Republican conference.
• Former House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.), as part of a deal to obtain the speakership in 2023, brought back the single-member rule.
• While three of the four motions to vacate introduced in U.S. history — including against Johnson and McCarthy — were brought by Republicans against GOP speakers, Democrat Albert Burleson introduced one against Republican Speaker Joseph Cannon in 1910.

What they're saying: "It's a very dark day for democracy in America if this is adopted," Rep. Joe Morelle (D-N.Y.), the top Democrat on the House Administration Committee, told Axios.

• Morelle said he "can't imagine there is any precedent" for the rule, adding: "What's next? Allowing only Republicans to speak on the floor?"
• The senior House Democrat who spoke anonymously told Axios that their colleagues were reading through the text of the package on Wednesday and "don't like" the change.

Between the lines: Johnson likely has more to fear from his own party, even as his relationships with House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) and rank-and-file Democrats have all but broken down.

• He faces roughly a dozen GOP holdouts in the Jan. 3 speaker election, including a firm "no" in Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.).
• The rules change is "an indication of not just how weak he feels but how weak he actually is," said Rep. Becca Balint (D-Vt.), arguing that GOP leadership "can't stand on its own without bending and changing rules."
• Said Morelle: "I suppose this travesty is necessary in the Speaker's mind because his leadership is so tenuous. There's no way for him to 'win' the game unless the 'fix' is in. But this is deeply troubling."

What's next: The House is set to vote on the package on Jan. 3 after the speaker is elected and members are sworn in — though that may be contingent on Johnson winning on the first ballot.

• Rules packages are typically approved along party lines, though Johnson is set to have only a 219-215 majority with which to pass it.
• Some right-wing Republicans have threatened to tank the package over a provision in the bill teeing up a vote to sanction the International Criminal Court.

The bottom line: Some Democrats are warning Johnson against the move by arguing that it could end up backfiring on Republicans.

• Rep. Jared Moskowitz (D-Fla.) called it a "major mistake," telling Axios: "We didn't make the motion to vacate, his own members did. He came to us … to table the motion."
• "This will start the eroding of the minority party. Should this succeed, in just a couple of years his members won't be on committees or be able to file bills in the minority," he added. "You break it, you own it."

Detractors and skeptics of House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) appear to be only digging in ahead of the House speaker election on Jan. 3.

Why it matters: House GOP hardliners' continued hesitance to coalesce around Johnson suggests that President-elect Trump's endorsement of the incumbent speaker has had little effect so far.

• Johnson's right flank is incensed at him reaching across the aisle to Democrats on government spending and foreign aid.
• Some are arguing that the House GOP needs a more uncompromising leader coming into the new Trump administration.

What they're saying: Rep. Ralph Norman (R-S.C.) told Axios that "a growing number of members" want "at minimum, assurances" from Johnson on "meaningful cuts" to spending before they vote to re-elect him.

• He joins roughly a dozen House Republicans who declined to commit to voting for Johnson even after Trump endorsed him on Monday.
• Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-Colo.) is the latest, with her office declining to comment on Tuesday when asked how she plans to vote.

By the numbers: Johnson is set to have a 219-215 majority when the House reconvenes on Jan. 3.

• Assuming full attendance from both sides, that means he will only be able to afford a single Republican voting for an alternative candidate.
• Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) has promised to be that Republican, meaning Johnson has virtually no room for additional defections from his side.

Yes, but: Johnson has been making calls over the holiday break, multiple sources familiar with the matter told Axios.

• One of the calls was with the "Five Families," a group of ideological factions within the House GOP, according to one House Republican.
• Some "commitments to the holdouts are on the table," the lawmaker told Axios, but "nothing formal" like changes to House rules.

House Republicans on Wednesday released their proposed rules package for the 119th Congress, which includes several notable changes to the rules that governed the lower chamber for the last two years.

Why it matters: The most crucial alteration raises the threshold to introduce a motion to vacate — a measure to force a vote on ousting the House speaker.

• Instead of any single House member being able to force such a vote, now any such motion will have to be introduced by a Republican joined by eight additional GOP co-sponsors.
• The change is the result of a deal struck between House Republican factions in November as the GOP met to renominate House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.).

The details: The 36-page package formally dissolves the congressional Diversity & Inclusion Office, a longstanding target for House Republicans.

• Funding for the office was already gutted by a government spending bill passed in March with plans to absorb it into a new Office of Talent Management, but Democrats had hoped to revive it if they won back the House majority.
• The rules package also changes the name of the House Committee on Oversight and Accountability back to the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.
• The name was initially changed in the 118th Congress to reflect the flurry of probes Republicans launched into the Biden administration. The incoming Trump administration is expected to face far less scrutiny.

Zoom in: The package also renames the Office of Congressional Ethics – another common GOP target – to the Office of Congressional Conduct.

• It authorizes subpoenas of Attorney General Merrick Garland and other DOJ officials as part of House Republicans' investigations into the Biden family's finances.
• And it sets up votes on a dozen GOP bills implementing strict border security measures, sanctioning the International Criminal Court, requiring proof of citizenship to vote in federal elections and more.

The other side: Rep. Jim McGovern (D-Mass.), the top Democrat on the House Rules Committee, homed in on the fact that the rules would only allow members of the majority party to introduce motions to vacate.

• "Their proposed changes would, for the first time in American history, shield the Speaker from accountability to the entire chamber," he said.
• Of the whole package, he added: "The American people did not vote for whatever the hell this is—and you better believe that Democrats will not let Republicans turn the House of Representatives into a rubber stamp for their extremist policies."

What's next: The House is scheduled to reconvene on Jan. 3 to vote to elect a speaker, swear in its members and finally vote on the rules package.

• A Friday vote on the rules package is not guaranteed, however, as Johnson's skeptics are threatening to deny him the gavel on the first ballot.

Editor's note: This article has been updated with comment from Rep. Jim McGovern.

House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) is not out of the woods in his fight to retain his gavel, even after receiving a crucial endorsement from President-elect Trump.

Why it matters: The Jan. 3 speaker election will now be an early test not only of Johnson's ability to lead his conference into the coming legislative battles — but of Trump's as well.

Driving the news: Trump said Monday in a post on Truth Social that Johnson is a "good, hard working, religious man" who has his "Complete & Total Endorsement."

• The endorsement came after weeks of right-wing anger toward Johnson for passing a government funding bill with bipartisan support.
• Trump himself was reportedly frustrated with Johnson for failing to tack on a debt limit increase — something he is still demanding before Jan. 20.

State of play: Johnson is set to have just a 219-215 majority when the House returns on Jan. 3, meaning he will likely only be able to lose one vote.

• Trump's endorsement pushed some uncommitted members, like Rep. Troy Nehls (R-Texas) and Josh Brecheen (R-Okla.), to back Johnson.
• But it hasn't swayed Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.), the one House Republican who has said he plans to vote against Johnson.
• "I respect and support President Trump, but his endorsement of Mike Johnson is going to work out about as well as his endorsement of Speaker Paul Ryan," Massie said in a post on X.

Zoom in: Several other undecideds said Monday they, too, are unconvinced by Trump's support for Johnson.

• Rep. Victoria Spartz (R-Ind.), who has a list of demands for Johnson on reducing government spending, said on X that "we still need to get assurances that [Johnson] won't sell us out to the swamp."
• Rep. Andy Biggs (R-Ariz.) "still has not made any public or private commitments on Speaker Johnson," his spokesperson told Axios.
• "I'm undecided," said Rep. Tim Burchett (R-Tenn.), who has stressed that Trump's endorsement would be decisive for Johnson's chances.
• House Freedom Caucus Chair Andy Harris (R-Md.), who has pushed Johnson to eschew dealmaking with Democrats, is "still undecided," his spokesperson said.

Zoom out: The incoming president maintains the strict loyalty of his party, but he has at times struggled to work his will on the legislative process.

• His backing of former House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) in 2023 did little to dislodge the Californian's right-wing detractors, who only relented after 15 grueling ballots.
• And just this month, 38 Republicans broke with their party and voted against a combined spending and debt limit bill that Trump had demanded — despite the threat of primary challenges.

What's next: Johnson will spend the four days trying to whip his last few holdouts as they demand spending and process-related concessions.

• He is making calls and reaching out to GOP lawmakers who have not yet committed to supporting him, sources familiar with the matter told Axios.

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

President-elect Trump on Monday endorsed House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) to keep his gavel when the House meets to elect a speaker on Jan. 3.

Why it matters: Trump's backing could help Johnson put down a nascent rebellion led by right-wing hardliners incensed by this month's spending fight.

• "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.
• House Republicans were also beset by infighting and palace intrigue, most notably the ouster of former House Speaker Kevin McCarthy.
• 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.
• Congress ended up passing a trimmed-down package, and some of the excluded bills got passed anyway while others were left on the cutting room floor.

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."

Go deeper: Fetterman on an island as he reaches out to MAGA