At first glance, it seems like DOGE's work to slash the federal workforce mainly impact the solidly Democratic areas in the Washington, D.C. metro area. Then you dig a little deeper.

Why it matters: Of the 60 congressional districts with the most federal workers, a slight majority are actually represented by Republicans — many of whom are publicly cheering on Elon Musk's hack-and-slash efforts.

• House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) is on the list. So is Rep. Andy Harris (R-Md.), who leads the ultra-conservative Freedom Caucus, and Rep. Tom Cole (R-Okla.), the chair of the House Appropriations Committee.
• Several of their endangered GOP incumbents — including Reps. Jen Kiggans (R-Va.) and Juan Ciscomani (R-Ariz.) — are on there as well.

By the numbers: According to a 2024 Congressional Research Service report, nearly all of the 10 districts with highest proportions of federal workers are in D.C., Virginia or Maryland.

• As Axios' Cuneyt Dil recently noted, D.C. is essentially a company town where the factory is the vast federal government bureaucracy. Many of its workers live in D.C.'s surrounding suburbs and exurbs.
• Once you get past the top 10, ruby red states like Oklahoma, Alabama and Texas start to show up more.

Zoom in: Beyond D.C., the Defense Department — which isn't being spared DOGE's wrath — accounts for high concentrations in some districts.

• Kiggans and Cole both represent districts with large military installations that have long been major employers for their constituents.
• Rep. Nick Begich (R-Alaska) has a large military constituency, but agencies like the Interior Department, FAA and Postal Service also have significant presences, according to the Anchorage Daily News.

Between the lines: Even as they have applauded DOGE's cuts in public, some Republicans have privately expressed pause at Musk's ruthless tactics.

• "It would be more helpful if some of those DOGE folks showed more sensitivity to the people who are being terminated this way ... who didn't do anything wrong," one House Republican told Axios last month.
• Another said Musk is "more liked by people in the White House than anyone here [in Congress] because we have to deal with the ramifications of what he says."

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) and his leadership deputies said Friday they will not lend their support to the stopgap spending bill being proposed by Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.).

Why it matters: Democrats are holding out for language that will restrict President Trump and DOGE from being able to slash government programs already authorized and funded by Congress.

• House Democrats from across the party's ideological spectrum have argued the onus of averting a government shutdown falls squarely on Republicans, who control Congress and the White House.
• Johnson will likely need Democratic votes to pass any government funding measure. Even if he manages to pass a GOP-only bill, Democrats can block it in the Senate.

What they're saying: With a week until the March 14 government shutdown deadline, Jeffries, House Minority Whip Katherine Clark (D-Mass.) and Democratic caucus chair Pete Aguilar (D-Calif.) wrote that the continuing resolution Republicans are expected to put forth is "not acceptable."

• "Republicans have decided to introduce a partisan continuing resolution that threatens to cut funding for healthcare, nutritional assistance and veterans benefits through the end of the current fiscal year," they said.
• The Democratic leaders said they would "enthusiastically support a bill that protects Social Security, Medicare, veterans health and Medicaid," but that "Medicaid is our redline."

Between the lines: Democrats have been fighting for language that constricts DOGE's ability to get around the funding guidelines passed by Congress.

• Republicans so far have declined to accede to that as they largely cheer on DOGE's cuts, and as such funding talks have stalled.
• That leaves the federal government hurtling towards a shutdown.

The other side: "House Democrats admitted they wanted a government shutdown, and now they're following through," said National Republican Congressional Committee spokesperson Mike Marinella.

• "They're deliberately making our country less safe and less prosperous just to score political points. House Democrats will always put politics over people."

A House Republican said Thursday he will force votes on kicking dozens of Democratic colleagues off of their committees for chanting and singing on the House floor over the objections of Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.).

Why it matters: The incident came in response to Republicans and nearly a dozen Democrats voting to censure Rep. Al Green (D-Texas) for disrupting President Trump's speech to Congress.

• As Johnson read out the resolution censuring Green, dozens of House Democrats, primarily Black Caucus members and progressives, stood in the well of the House singing "We Shall Overcome."
• Johnson repeatedly banged the gavel and said, "The House will come to order," before putting the House in recess until the disruption subsided.

What they're saying: "Today, a group of House Democrats broke decorum during the censure of Rep. Al Green and, after multiple warnings, refused to heed [Johnson's] order," Rep. Andy Ogles (R-Tenn.) said in a post on X.

• Ogles said he is drafting privileged resolutions — which any member can force to a vote with or without support from leadership — to "remove each of them from their committees."
• "If you want to act like a child in the Halls of Congress, you will be treated like a child," Ogles said.

Zoom in: Ogles' two-page resolution says that "several Representatives should be removed from their committee assignments in light of conduct they exhibited on the floor," according to a copy obtained by Axios.

• The measure directs the House sergeant-at-arms to "provide a determination as to which Members ignored the Speaker's directive."
• Ogles told Axios he plans to speak to Johnson next week about bringing the measure up for a vote.

The other side: House Minority Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.), in a video posted to social media Thursday night, blasted Ogles as a "far-right extremist" and a "fraud," and said his resolution is "going nowhere."

• "You ain't throwing no one off of any single committee," the Democratic leader said. "These people are malignant clowns. ... Don't make me expose you to folks that don't know you."

Editor's note: This story has been updated with comment from House Minority Hakeem Jeffries and has been corrected to reflect that Rep. Al Green represents Texas (not Arizona).

House Democratic leadership is privately confronting members who disrupted President Trump's speech to Congress, Axios has learned.

Why it matters: Many progressives defied House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries' (D-N.Y.) request to avoid making themselves the story.

• Jeffries, in a dear colleague letter ahead of the speech, urged a "strong, determined and dignified Democratic presence in the chamber."
• Trump's speech was instead rocked by constant heckling. Democrats held up signs and other props, and Rep. Al Green (D-Texas) was ejected.
• In meetings and discussions with leadership this week, Democrats who heckled, walked out in protest or were otherwise disruptive were given a talking to about their tactics, sources said.

What we're hearing: Leadership is "very unhappy" with those who went beyond traditional protest tactics like outfit coordination and refusal to clap, a senior House Democrat told Axios.

• Roughly a dozen Democratic disruptors — including Reps. Melanie Stansbury (D-N.M.), Jasmine Crockett (D-Texas), Maxwell Frost (D-Fla.) and Maxine Dexter (D-Ore.) — were called into a "come to Jesus meeting" on Thursday morning, the senior Dem told Axios.
• The top three House Democratic leaders were present: Jeffries, Minority Whip Katherine Clark (D-Mass.) and Caucus Chair Pete Aguilar (D-Calif.).

Yes, but: A source familiar with the matter stressed that these lawmakers are "not getting yelled at."

• "It's a consultative process. We understand the pressure they are under." "They are not being talked to like they are children. We are helping them understand why their strategy is a bad idea," the source said.
• A spokesperson for Jeffries declined to address the private meeting. Spokespeople for Clark and Aguilar did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

What to watch: Some Democrats said they expect leadership to take a harder tack going forward to prevent these moments of public disunity from happening ahead of time.

• Said a second House Democrat who spoke anonymously: "It doesn't surprise me leadership is very upset. They gave specific instructions not to do that."
• "Would they have done that to [Speaker Emerita Nancy Pelosi]? You know the answer: Never," the lawmaker said. "So you've got to put the hammer down."

Congressional Democrats' internal divisions over how to combat President Trump surfaced with a fury Wednesday after the president was repeatedly heckled and disrupted during his speech to Congress.

Why it matters: The party is in a rut, stumbling on finding the most effective counterattack to Trump's full-bore assault on the federal bureaucracy. That struggle played out on primetime television Tuesday night.

• Democrats have been bombarded by grassroots activists demanding they scrap norms and traditions in favor of bare-knuckle political brawling.
• But many party leaders and other establishment-oriented Democrats believe that a more narrow, subdued approach remains the most effective.
• A senior House Democrat told Axios that some moderates are angry at progressives for their outbursts, but added that "people are pissed at leadership too. … Everyone is mad at everyone."

What happened: Trump's speech was rocked by disruptions right from the start, with Rep. Al Green (D-Texas) repeatedly heckling the president until Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) ordered Green escorted out of the chamber.

• Democrats held up signs and wore shirts with slogans blasting DOGE and Elon Musk, walked out of the chamber in protest, and heckled Trump throughout his 100-minute speech.
• A large portion of Democrats opted for more traditional, silent forms of protest — color-coordinated outfits or refusing to stand or clap for most of the speech — without resorting to disruptive tactics.

What they're saying: Rep. George Latimer (D-N.Y.) said he felt the disruptions were "inappropriate," telling Axios, "When a president — my president, your president — is speaking, we don't interrupt, we don't pull those stunts."

• "I didn't take that approach myself, so obviously I don't condone it," centrist Rep. Jared Golden (D-Maine) said of the disruptions.
• Rep. Tom Suozzi (D-N.Y.) told Axios: "I think it was a big mistake ... I'm an old school traditional type guy, I think we should be treating the president with deference. So I think it was inappropriate."
• Sen. John Fetterman (D-Pa.), in a post on X, lamented what he called a "sad cavalcade of self owns and unhinged petulance" and told Axios: "I don't think that's the way forward."

Zoom in: It's not just about decorum and norms. Some Democrats argued that the disruptive lawmakers failed on the messaging front as well.

• Golden told Axios: "If anyone is thinking that it was an effective strategy, they're probably in an echo chamber. My take is that the average American thought the optics were pretty bad."
• "It would be a compliment to call it a strategy," said another centrist House Democrat, pointing to online photoshops of the signs members held up.
• The lawmaker also criticized colleagues who refused to applaud even Trump's guests: "Not standing for Trump would have been a fine strategy, but you need to separate him from the kid with cancer."
• Several House Democrats noted that most of the disruptors were mostly progressives from safe districts — arguing that swing-district voters were turned off by their outbursts.

Yes, but: Some progressives are training their fire on leadership, arguing that a lack of top-down coordination left rank-and-file lawmakers to develop their own tactics.

• Even before the speech, "there was definitely frustration about lack of guidance [or a] plan," said one progressive lawmaker.
• Said another: "People are super pissed that we didn't get more direction from leadership."
• Leadership had urged members to attend the speech, bring guests negatively impacted by DOGE and not use props: "I actually believe that what happened yesterday — the leader did not want that," said the centrist Democrat.

What to watch: Some Democrats aren't ruling out voting for Rep. Dan Newhouse's (R-Wash.) resolution to censure Green for "breach of proper conduct" when it comes up Thursday.

• Golden and Rep. Don Davis (D-N.C.) told Axios they are undecided on the measure.
• The centrist House Democrat who spoke on the condition of anonymity told Axios: "What [Green] did was inappropriate — and he became the story, not the price of eggs."
• But other centrists argued there is a partisan double-standard at play: "I will vote against censure because the other side was equally or more misbehaved," said Rep. Vicente Gonzalez (D-Texas).

Editor's note: This article was updated with comment from Rep. Tom Suozzi.

Rep. Al Green (D-Texas) was escorted out of the House chamber on Tuesday for heckling President Trump during his address to a joint session of Congress.

Why it matters: It was a breach of decorum, followed by an unprecedented removal of a member of Congress from a presidential speech, that reflects Democrats' desire to show fierce resistance to Trump.

• Just minutes into Trump's speech, Green stood up and yelled, "Mr. President, you don't have a mandate!"
• Republicans immediately drowned him out by yelling "sit down" and chanting "U-S-A!" with Green attempting to continue shouting every time they finished.
• Eventually, House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) instructed Green to "cease any further disruptions." When Green refused, Johnson ordered the House sergeant-at-arms to escort him out.

Zoom in: Green is one of the most staunchly anti-Trump members of Congress and has said he plans to introduce articles of impeachment against the president.

• He is largely alone in that crusade, with Democratic leadership distancing themselves from his efforts.

Zoom out: Green's outburst was part of a broader campaign of disruption waged by Democrats who believe their constituents want to see them ramp up their displays of opposition.

• Many Democrats held up signs reading "SAVE MEDICAID," "MUSK STEALS" and "LIES". Others wore shirts that said "RESIST" and "NO KING. NO COUP". One brandished a pocket Constitution.
• Trump was repeatedly heckled by Democrats shouting things like "that's a lie," though not to the same extent as Green.

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

The right-wing House Freedom Caucus on Tuesday issued a threat to try to censure any Democratic lawmakers or guests who disrupt President Trump's speech to Congress.

Why it matters: The declaration is in response to Axios' reporting that some Democrats have considered bringing noisemakers or walking out of the speech to display their opposition to the Republican president.

• There is considerable internal division within the Democratic caucus about whether to use more disruptive tactics or stick to traditional, silent protest.
• House Democratic leadership has urged its members not to bring props into the House chamber.

What they're saying: "The President's address to tonight's joint session of Congress is a constitutional obligation — not a sideshow for Democrats to use noisemakers, make threats, throw things or otherwise disrupt," the Freedom Caucus' board said in a statement.

• "Our colleagues are on notice that the heckler's veto will not be tolerated. You will be censured," they continued.
• The right-wing group also warned that they "expect the Sergeant at Arms and Capitol Police to take appropriate action against any Members of Congress or other persons violating House rules."

Between the lines: Heckling and disruptions have become increasingly common during State of the Union addresses and other speeches to joint sessions of Congress in recent years.

• Rep. Joe Wilson's (R-S.C.) shouting "you lie" during then-President Obama's address in 2009 was considered a shocking breach of decorum at the time.
• Biden was repeatedly heckled by Republicans at his State of the Union addresses, with one Republican guest even getting arrested in 2024 for yelling at Biden about the 2021 Kabul airport bombing.
• Reps. Lauren Boebert (R-Colo.) and Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) — both members of the Freedom Caucus at the time — chanted "build the wall" during Biden's address in 2022.

Even before President Trump took the podium to address a joint session of Congress on Tuesday, Democrats began disrupting the proceedings. Within minutes, a lawmaker was escorted out of the chamber.

Why it matters: The Democratic protests from inside the chamber represent an unprecedented level of coordination that reflects the immense grassroots pressure the party is facing to mount a resistance to Trump.

What happened: As Trump walked down the aisle, Rep. Melanie Stansbury (D-N.M.), the ranking member of the House's DOGE subcommittee, held up a sign reading "This is NOT Normal."

• Rep. Lance Gooden (R-Texas) reached across the aisle, grabbed Stansbury's sign and yanked it out of her hand. Stansbury later fundraised off the moment.
• Soon after, dozens of Democrats held up signs reading "SAVE MEDICAID," "MUSK STEALS" and "PROTECT VETERANS" — which, when flipped around, also said "FALSE" on the back.
• Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.) held up a whiteboard on which she wrote various messages, including: "Cut Elon, NOT Social Security."

Between the lines: The use of signs came despite Democratic leadership urging its members ahead of the speech not to use props or use any tactics that would make them the story.

• Many members of the Democrats' more establishment wing opposed the use of disruptive tactics and opted for silent forms of protest such as outfit coordination and refusal to clap.
• But progressives argued to colleagues privately, and told Axios, that their constituents were demanding to see more vocal resistance to Trump by the party's elected officials.

Zoom in: As Trump began speaking, even more raucous disruptions began. Rep. Al Green (D-Texas), one of Trump's fiercest critics in Congress who plans to try to impeach him, stood up and shouted, "Mr. President, you don't have a mandate."

• Republicans shouted back in an attempt to drown him out. After a back and forth in which Green refused to stop heckling, House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) ordered the House sergeant-at-arms to escort him out.
• Other Democrats repeatedly peppered Trump with heckling throughout his speech, often shouting, "Those are lies!"
• As Trump spoke about law enforcement, several House Democrats shouted about the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol.

Several House Democrats — including Reps. Maxwell Frost (D-Fla.), Jasmine Crockett (D-Texas), Maxine Dexter (D-Ore.), Andrea Salinas (D-Ore.), LaMonica McIver (D-N.J.) Sydney Kamlager-Dove (D-Calif.) — walked out of the speech several minutes later.

• Crockett, Salinas and Dexter revealed shirts that read "RESIST" on the back. Frost's shirt said "NO KINGS LIVE HERE," and Kamlager-Dove's said "PRESIDENT MUSK."
• Rep. Delia Ramirez (D-Ill.), who did not walk out of the speech, wore a shirt that said "NO KING. NO COUP."
• More groups of Democrats gradually walked out throughout the speech, including Reps. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), Jared Huffman (D-Calif.), Dave Min (D-Calif.) and Bill Foster (D-Ill.).

What they're saying: After he was ejected, Green told reporters the mandate he was referencing was a mandate to cut Medicaid and other government programs.

• "It's worth it to let people know that there are some people who are going to stand up," the Texas Democrat said of his ejection.

More from Axios:

• In photos: Democrats protest Trump's speech
• lotkin hits at Musk and "gang of 20-year-olds" in rebuttal to Trump address
• 100 minutes of the world according to Trump

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

Democratic lawmakers are discussing a litany of options to protest at President Trump's speech to Congress on Tuesday, including through outright disruption, a half dozen House Democrats told Axios.

Why it matters: Some of these tactics go beyond their leaders' recommendation that members bring guests hurt by Trump and DOGE. This sets up a potential clash between party traditionalists and its more combative anti-Trump wing.

• "The part that we all agree on is that this is not business as usual and we would like to find a way — productively — to express our outrage," one House Democrat told Axios.
• There is widespread disagreement among Democrats, both inside and outside of Congress, over what would be the most appropriate and effective form of demonstration.

What we're hearing: Some members have told colleagues they may walk out of the chamber when Trump says specific lines they find objectionable, lawmakers told Axios.

• Criticism of transgender kids was brought up as a line in the sand that could trigger members to storm out, according to a House Democrat.

A wide array of props — including noisemakers — has also been floated:

• Signs with anti-Trump or anti-DOGE messages — just as Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.) held up a sign during Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's speech last year that said "war criminal."
• Eggs or empty egg cartons to highlight how inflation is driving up the price of eggs.
• Pocket constitutions to make the case that Trump has been violating the Constitution by shutting down congressionally authorized agencies.
• Hand clappers, red cards like those held up to express disagreement at town halls, and various other props have also been discussed.

The intrigue: In closed-door meetings and on the House floor Monday night, lawmakers were specifically discouraged from using props, two House Democrats told Axios.

• These tactics are also a source of considerable internal debate among House Democratic rank-and-file — in large part based on what they've heard back in their districts.
• "There are definitely a lot of constituents that really want Democrats to disrupt and there are ... constituents who feel like that just plays into his hands," one House Democrat told Axios.

Zoom out: Disruptions during joint session speeches used to provoke outrage, but have become increasingly common in recent years.

• Rep. Joe Wilson's (R-S.C.) outburst at former President Obama — ''you lie," he shouted — was a shocking event in 2009.
• Former President Biden was persistently heckled by Republicans during multiple State of the Union addresses.
• Then there was the aforementioned disruption of Netanyahu's speech by Tlaib.

Zoom in: Some groups of Democrats plan to mount more traditional protests through the use of color coordination in their wardrobe choices.

• Pink: The Democratic Women's Caucus wants all their members to wear pink in a unified display of defiance to a president many of them despise.
• Black: Female members of the Congressional Black Caucus have separately discussed donning black to more accurately capture the party's somber mood.
• Blue and yellow: Ukraine Caucus co-chair Marcy Kaptur (D-Ohio) will distribute ties and scarves with the colors of Ukraine's flag to signal support for President Volodymyr Zelensky.

Others plan to sit stone-faced and refuse to clap during the entire speech, another time-honored tactic for opposition party members to silently protest the president.

What they're saying: House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) wrote in a letter to House Democrats that he and other leaders plan to attend the speech to "make clear to the nation that there is a strong opposition party ready, willing and able to serve as a check and balance."

• Jeffries also said leadership understands if some members skip the speech — as several have said they plan to do — but urged a "strong, determined and dignified Democratic presence in the chamber."
• House Democratic caucus chair Pete Aguilar (D-Calif.) told Axios leadership is telling members to "keep the focus on the health and safety and the economic wellbeing of our constituents."

The bottom line: "Whether we are wearing pink, or black, or yellow and blue, we are all conveying our displeasure with this administration," said. Rep. Stacey Plaskett (D-V.I.).

• "What's more important is our work together and the pressure for three Republicans to do the right thing for everyone," she said.

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

A Democratic boycott is developing ahead of President Trump's address to Congress on Tuesday, Axios has learned.

Why it matters: Democratic leaders have asked lawmakers to show up to the speech with people affected by DOGE and Trump's federal funding freeze.

• Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.), one of the most senior Democrats in the Senate, will not attend Trump's speech on Tuesday, Axios has learned
• Neither will Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), who will instead host an online town hall.

Zoom in: On the House side, Rep. Becca Balint (D-Vt.) told Axios she does not plan to attend and will instead participate in a MoveOn livestream with Senate Democrats.

• "I know I would hear more of the same [lies] if I attended tonight. I want to be part of an alternative event that will be fact checking in real time. That's the best way I can use my voice tonight for Vermonters," she said.
• Rep. Sean Casten (D-Ill.) also plans to skip the speech, his office told Axios.
• Several other House Democrats told Axios last week they were on the fence about attending, with Rep. Jasmine Crockett (D-Texas) saying: "As of now, I don't have any reason to go."

Catch up quick: Democrats on Capitol Hill are split on how to best handle Trump's first big address to Congress of his second term.

• They have a guest list that they hope will showcase what they argue are the harms of Trump's first month in office.
• House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) wrote in a letter to his caucus Monday that the decision to attend is a "personal one" and that he understands members will "come to different conclusions."
• "However, it is important to have a strong, determined and dignified Democratic presence in the chamber. The House as an institution belongs to the American people, and as their representatives we will not be run off the block or bullied," he added.

Go deeper: Fuming Democrats struggle with Trump speech strategy

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

President Trump's explosive Oval Office meeting with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky shocked hawkish Republican lawmakers and led one prominent GOP backer of Ukraine to suggest that Zelensky should resign.

Why it matters: The meeting angered Democrats, who were horrified by Trump and Vice President Vance's conduct. It offended some Republicans, with most of them reserving their ire for Zelensky.

• "He needs to either resign or change," Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) told reporters outside the West Wing.
• Zelesnky "has made it almost impossible to sell to the American people that he's a good investment."

Other Republicans shared their concern about the long-term fallout of the short-tempered meeting.

• Rep. Don Bacon (R-Neb.), in a text to Axios, said Friday was "a bad day for America's foreign policy."
• "Ukraine wants independence, free markets and rule of law. It wants to be part of the West. Russia hates us and our Western values. We should be clear that we stand for freedom," he said.
• Rep. Mike Lawler (R-N.Y.), in a post on X, called the meeting "a disaster — especially for Ukraine," adding, "Sadly, the only winner of today is Vladimir Putin.

What they are saying: The most heated GOP criticism targeted Zelensky, while others argued the meeting was a loss for both countries.

• "I don't know if Zelensky can ever get where you want to go with the United States. Either he dramatically changes, or you need to get someone new," Graham said on Fox News' "America Reports."
• He described Zelensky as having "a chip on his shoulder." "I don't know if you can repair the damage. I don't know if you can ever do a deal with Zelensky anymore," he added, encouraging Zelensky to apologize.

The other side: Democrats were nearly unanimous in their condemnation of Trump's and Vance's behavior.

• "Trump and Vance are doing Putin's dirty work," Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y) said on X. "Senate Democrats will never stop fighting for freedom and democracy."
• "Trump and Vance tag teamed Zelensky," said Rep. Chuy Garcia (D-Ill.). "Truly shameful conduct that the world is seeing. Embarrassing."

What happened: The press conference with Trump, Zelensky, Vance and other leaders began with statements and questions from reporters — but devolved into a shouting match.

• Vance accused Zelensky of being disrespectful and ungrateful for U.S. support.
• Trump released a statement afterward, saying that he had determined Zelensky is "not ready for Peace if America is involved." Lunch and a joint press conference between the two leaders were canceled.
• Zelensky departed the White House about two and a half hours after he arrived, and a highly anticipated minerals deal was not signed.

Democratic lawmakers, united in their fury over DOGE, are diverging on how to use President Trump's address to Congress next week as the effective launchpad for Resistance 2.0.

Why it matters: It's a question that has repeatedly splintered party members when faced with inflammatory speeches on Capitol Hill: Should they show up and protest from within, or boycott and counterprogram on the outside?

• House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) want members to attend and bring special guests who have been negatively affected by the administration.
• "We ask that House Democrats attending the Joint Address bring a guest who has been harmed by the Trump administration's early actions," the Democratic Policy and Communications Committee (DPCC) told congressional offices in a memo obtained by Axios.

Zoom in: However, there are lawmakers in the House and Senate who believe a different form of resistance — nonparticipation — may be a better way to meet the moment.

• Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) told Axios he is leaning against attending the speech because "when Trump does it, it's not a serious event."
• "We want to make [clear] that things are not business as usual. Things are falling apart," said Rep. Maxwell Frost (D-Fla.), a DPCC co-chair who is undecided on attending.

What we're hearing: Other lawmakers told Axios their plans fell through or they will take their spouses, as is common.

• Rep. Joe Morelle (D-N.Y.), Jeffries' top Democrat on the House Administration Committee, said he committed weeks ago to give his plus-one to a Republican colleague.
• "I hadn't really given much thought to bringing someone, partly out of my frustration with the president," Morelle told Axios.

Zoom out: Democrats have been debating the best method to fight their way out of the political wilderness. Initially, party leadership declined to respond in kind to Trump's flood-the-zone strategy.

• But under a barrage of admonishment from their grassroots to "fight harder," many Democrats have shifted to a more proactive posture of resistance.
• Leaders are trying to balance those two approaches by urging Democrats to stay laser-focused on hitting Musk and GOP spending cuts — including with Trump's speech.
• "It is more important than ever that House Democrats tune out the stream of chaos and ... communicate with precision on the issues that matter," said the DPCC memo.

By the numbers: Nearly a dozen House and Senate Democrats told Axios they are either leaning against attending the speech or undecided.

• Sens. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Ed Markey (D-Mass.) and Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.) all declined to commit to attending.
• So did Reps. Don Beyer (D-Va.), Mike Quigley (D-Ill.) and Mark DeSaulnier (D-Calif.).
• "As of now, I don't have any reason to go," said Jasmine Crockett (D-Texas). "I know what he's going to say — he's going to get up there, he's going to lie, he's going to praise [Russian President Vladimir] Putin and all kinds of other nonsense."

The other side: "I know that many of my colleagues are eager to sit in and express our profound opposition to everything going on," said Rep. Jared Huffman (D-Calif.).

• "It is far better to push back inside the room, I think, than outside."

House Republicans notched a major legislative victory this week when they passed their budget resolution. Now comes the hard part: Crafting a fiscal package that doesn't doom them in the 2026 election.

Why it matters: Some Republicans already see signs that the backlash to the Trump administration's "efficiency" efforts is spilling over into opposition to their legislative plans.

• One Republican moderate, speaking on the condition of anonymity to give candid thoughts about political concerns surrounding their party's marquee legislation, told Axios: "It could be trouble."
• "We saw what happened in 2018," the lawmaker said, referring to the midterm year in which voter anger over the GOP's legislative efforts helped Democrats flip more than 40 House seats.

Driving the news: The House voted Tuesday to adopt House Republicans' budget resolution, with all but one House Republican voting in favor of the measure and every Democrat opposing it.

• The resolution — a first step toward the hulking budget reconciliation bill Republicans hope to pass — allows $4.5 trillion in tax cuts, offset by $2 trillion in spending cuts.
• The vote came after a tortured process in which House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) strained to bring together right-wing hardliners who want greater spending cuts and centrists fearful of cuts to programs like Medicaid.

State of play: After the vote, some vulnerable Republicans were quick to distance themselves from the notion that the budget measure does anything more than provide a conceptual framework for the final bill.

• "Last night's vote was just a procedural step to start federal budget negotiations and does NOT change any current laws," Rep. Rob Bresnahan (R-Pa.) said in a strident statement Wednesday morning.
• Rep. Ryan Zinke (R-Mont.), in a CNN interview, insisted there is "zero mention of cutting Medicaid" in the budget resolution — even as it calls for the Energy and Commerce Committee to seek $880 billion in cuts, some of which will likely have to come from Medicaid.

Between the lines: Republicans have been barraged the last week and a half by angry constituents at town halls and protests outside their district offices complaining about DOGE's layoffs and cuts to federal programs.

• While DOGE has been the primary target of that voter blowback, House Republicans say they have also faced plenty of flack over the prospective benefit cuts in the GOP's fiscal package.
• "Most of the concern now is over ... DOGE," said a second House Republican who spoke anonymously, "but there's also, maybe not too far behind that, the message that they are trying to get across on reconciliation."

Zoom in: Despite voting for the budget measure, moderate and swing-district House Republicans told Axios they are drawing clear red lines on what they will support in a final package.

• "If that doesn't match with what our constituents and our district is looking for, then we won't be voting for that product," said a third House Republican.
• A fourth told Axios: "I have told my leadership ... there are scores of Republicans who don't want to go further [on Medicaid] than requiring work for able-bodied adults, getting the illegals off and rooting out waste, fraud and abuse."
• "If it goes further than that," they said, "the bill is probably dead."

Yes, but: Conservatives are equally emphatic the bill must include substantial enough cuts to Medicaid to offset the increases in spending — creating a seemingly unworkable dilemma for Johnson.

• Insufficiently deep Medicaid cuts are "probably a nonstarter," said Rep. Eric Burlison (R-Mo.).
• Burlison went as far as to say Republicans "should cut more" than the budget provides for, telling Axios: "I just had people in my office say, 'You didn't cut enough.'"

What to watch: Democrats are eager to exploit Republicans' struggles as the process of crafting the final package begins.

• "Health care's gone for everyone ... we just won back the House," exulted Rep. Haley Stevens (D-Mich.) coming out of the budget vote on Tuesday.
• Democrats' House Majority PAC is circulating a memo on the vote, first shared with Axios, titled: "House Republicans Ignore Constituents, Vote For Trump-Musk Agenda."

With the help of President Trump, Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) muscled a budget package through the House — a win he claimed will give him momentum to pass "Trump's full America First agenda — not just parts of it."

Why it matters: Johnson's dream of one big, beautiful bill will live another day. But so will the reality of his razor-thin House GOP majority.

• The extraordinary evening was an early taste of the chaos to come.

Zoom in: Just before 7:30pm ET, lawmakers began filing out of the House chamber after being told votes were done for the evening. Leadership thought they had too many holdouts to risk a vote.

Just 13 minutes later lawmakers were streaming back in — the vote was on.

• "I just got a call from my office, they said 'Come back, the vote is back on,'" exclaimed a befuddled Rep. Mike Kelly (R-Pa.).
• Some lawmakers had already been long gone. Several told Axios they were at dinner. At least one was at a Capitol Hill bar. Rep. Steve Womack (R-Ark.) said he was "halfway home."
• "I was already in my pajamas," quipped Rep. Scott Fitzgerald (R-Wisc.). The whole dynamic was "very odd," said Rep. Tom Suozzi (D-N.Y.).

Between the lines: Both parties pulled out all the stops to try and ensure their preferred outcome.

• Rep. Brittany Pettersen (D-Colo.) showed up despite giving birth less than a month ago. Rep. Dan Crenshaw (R-Texas) voted despite being sick.
• Rep. Kevin Mullin (D-Calif.), who is recovering from a blood clot in his leg and a knee infection contracted from surgery, arrived to vote using a walker.
• Only Rep. Raúl Grijalva (D-Calif.), 77, who has missed nearly every vote since Jan. 3 as he undergoes cancer treatment, was absent.

Zoom out: Remember, this procedural bill was the easy part.

• Passing the actual bill — which could include deep cuts to Medicaid — will require Republicans of all stripes to subordinate their personal goals for the overall ambitions of the party and their president.
• House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) is salivating at the opportunity to put Republicans on the record on their planned cuts, especially on social safety net programs.

What's next: Now Senate GOP Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) has to decide whether he wants to accept, or try to amend, the House budget reconciliation package.

• Many of his members, including Senate Finance Chair Mike Crapo (R-Idaho), want to make dramatic changes, including how Congress counts the cost of Trump's 2017 tax cuts.

Fresh off a week of being yelled at back home, Republicans returned to Capitol Hill suddenly pressing Elon Musk to project a kinder, friendlier face of DOGE.

Why it matters: Republican and Democratic congressional districts alike have been rattled by Musk's tactics for slashing government funding and terminating chunks of the federal workforce.

• "When you have a lot of people who are scared and a lot of people who are angry, of course you should take it seriously," said Rep. Rich McCormick (R-Ga.), one of several House Republicans who were grilled on DOGE at tense town halls last week.
• McCormick noted that Musk told Republicans to be more compassionate in 2022. "He's kind of forgotten some of that," McCormick said of Musk. "I want to be his conscience."
• Said Rep. Ryan Zinke (R-Mont.): "We can all agree on removing fraud, waste and abuse. ... Does it also mean that you remove benefits from those that need it? The answer is no."

State of play: The potential for anti-DOGE backlash was made all too real for Republicans last week, when angry constituents flooded their town halls and protested outside their offices in opposition to DOGE.

• Several House Republicans besides McCormick also faced raucous town hall audiences, while dozens of others faced protests outside of their district offices.
• Some Republicans have dismissed the sudden burst of local anti-DOGE energy as the work of liberal activist groups — but others are not so quick to shrug it off given the echoes of 2009 and 2017.

Between the lines: "It would be more helpful if some of those DOGE folks showed more sensitivity to the people who are being terminated this way ... who didn't do anything wrong," said one House Republican who was granted anonymity to speak candidly.

• "Some of that stuff is very necessary to reduce our spending, but we should show compassion for the people who are no longer getting a paycheck, and we should tighten up our messaging," the lawmaker said.
• Another House Republican vented that "a lot of people are losing their jobs, and they don't understand why."
• A third said Musk is "more liked by people in the White House than anyone here because we have to deal with the ramifications of what he says."

Zoom in: House Republicans vented about DOGE officials' tactics and lack of communication with Congress at their closed-door conference meeting Tuesday, according to multiple members in attendance.

• Members want to "communicate to the White House that there has to be a little more strategy and a little more recognition that these are people," according to the second House Republican who spoke anonymously.
• Said a fourth House Republican: "All of us are waiting to hear what's going to happen, and I'd rather not. I'd rather be told what the plan is, because we're certainly going to be asked questions about it."

Zoom in: There was also talk of holding an info session on town hall "best practices," including tips for not getting riled up by provocative activists and giving them a viral moment, the fourth lawmaker said.

• Some Republicans told Axios they are being responsive to what they have heard from constituents by pushing the administration to reinstate federal workers they think were wrongly fired.

Yes, but: Many Republicans maintained town halls and protests should be taken with a grain of salt, if not altogether discounted, because of liberal groups directing their members to show up in force.

• "There's some dissent out there, but there's a heck of a lot of support," said Rep. Dan Meuser (R-Pa.).
• Rep. Troy Nehls (R-Texas) told Axios: "I don't know why you'd want to hold a town hall right now. ... You know the left is going to set some people up in there just to be rabble-rousers."
• "Let's keep winning. That's it," said Nehls. "Town halls can come later."

House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) is once again grappling with persistent right-wing defectors ahead of a key budget vote that could come as soon as Tuesday evening.

Why it matters: The vote on a budget resolution is the critical first step towards passing the massive fiscal bill that President Trump has put forth.

• "Every time we've had a big vote on the House floor, we're talking to members all the way up until the moment the vote closes," House Majority Leader Steve Scalise (R-La.) said at a press conference.
• But Johnson, acknowledging the uncertainty, told reporters: "There may be a vote tonight, there may not be — stay tuned."

State of play: Several GOP lawmakers said Tuesday they remain opposed to the resolution, which would allow for $4.5 trillion in tax cuts, a $4 trillion debt ceiling increase and $2 trillion in spending cuts.

• "I'm very straightfoward with my opposition," said Rep. Victoria Spartz (R-Ind.), telling reporters that "a number of members have concerns."
• Rep. Tim Burchett (R-Tenn.) told Axios: "I'm still a no."

Between the lines: With a 218-215 majority, Republicans may not be able to afford the handful of defections that are currently expected.

• Democratic leaders are pressing for maximum attendance on their side to ensure Johnson has as little room for error as possible, Axios previously reported.
• Some Republicans are crossing their fingers that several older or ailing Democrats will be absent: "We can afford to lose three or four, depending on how many Dems show up," said one GOP lawmaker.

What we're hearing: In the conference meeting, Republicans framed a vote against the budget resolution as a vote against Trump's agenda, according to lawmakers who were present.

• One House Republican, speaking on the condition of anonymity, told Axios that leadership argued "if you don't support this budget resolution, that you're going to slow down the president's agenda — and you yourself will be responsible."
• That tactic seemed to fall flat with holdouts, however: Spartz said that leadership "shouldn't try to jam members with President Trump."

What they're saying: Some rank-and-file Republicans, coming out of the conference meeting, expressed a degree of skepticism that the scheduled 6:30pm vote will go ahead as planned.

• "I don't know that they can pull this together. It's hard to say," says Rep. Scott Fitzgerald (R-Wis.). "Sounds like there's a handful of members that aren't there yet."
• Rep. Ryan Zinke (R-Mont.) argued Johnson should hold the vote even if the measure isn't poised to pass: "Roll the dice ... put it on the floor and see."

While DOGE has begun facing a measure of GOP backlash, some Republicans are privately brushing off a spate of raucous protests and town halls in their districts targeting President Trump's government efficiency efforts.

Why it matters: The muted reaction signals at least some willingness, even by electorally vulnerable Republicans, to continue marching into this firestorm on behalf of the president to whom they've tethered their fates.

• Democrats, however, see echoes of their triumphant 2018 election cycle and are eager to press their advantage.
• "House Republicans have galvanized voters across the country to come out in protest against their Medicaid cuts, veteran layoffs, and defunding of health care for 9/11 first responders," said CJ Warnke, a spokesperson for Democrats' House Majority PAC.

Driving the news: Angry constituents flocked to House Republicans' town hall events and district offices this week to protest DOGE's efforts to slash spending and lay off huge chunks of the federal workforce.

• Rep. Rich McCormick (R-Ga.) faced a large and testy audience at a town hall on Thursday, with Reps. Cliff Bentz (R-Ore.), Stephanie Bice (R-Okla.) and Scott Fitzgerald (R-Wis.) also getting heated questioning.
• Swing-district Reps. David Schweikert (R-Ariz.), Ken Calvert (R-Calif.), Scott Perry (R-Pa.), Tom Kean Jr. (R-N.J.), Mike Lawler (R-N.Y.), Ryan Mackenzie (R-Pa.) and Bryan Steil (R-Wis.) all had demonstrations outside their offices.

What we're hearing: One swing-district House Republican, speaking on the condition of anonymity to share candid thoughts, told Axios they have "zero concerns" about a protest they're expecting outside their office.

• "It's 2017 all over. They've hated Trump since 2016. Same folks largely," the lawmaker said, although they added, "Most hate [Elon] Musk based on the calls."
• "That's all manufactured bulls**t for likes and clickbait," said another House Republican, who asked for anonymity to speak candidly about the upswell in protests.

Reality check: 2017 preceded a GOP wipeout in the 2018 midterm elections. Democrats took control of the House for the first time in nearly a decade by riding a wave of anti-Trump sentiment.

• Strategists on both sides expect any wave on either side to be far smaller next year, but Democrats are bullish they can at least retake the House by harnessing anger toward the administration.
• "House Republicans can run from town halls and protests, but they can't hide from their own constituents — and it will cost them in 2026," said Warnke.

Between the lines: The liberal groups who have bombarded Democratic lawmakers into demonstrating more active resistance to the administration are not shying away from their role in organizing these confrontations.

• MoveOn said in a press release: "MoveOn members and allies will show up at congressional-led town halls and congressional offices across the country, targeting House Republicans whose votes will be crucial in opposing Trump and Musk's harmful policies."
• The Working Families Party and Indivisible similarly lauded the protests, with Indivisible framing them as part of their "Week of Action."

Longtime Sen. Mitch McConnell's (R-Ky.) announcement Thursday that he will not seek reelection in 2026 has set off a furious scramble for the state's first vacant Senate seat in 15 years.

Why it matters: A large cohort of ambitious Kentucky Republicans has long been angling to succeed the 83-year-old former Senate GOP leader, who has held his seat since 1985.

• The state's other senator, Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), was first elected in 2010.

Driving the news: McConnell, the longest serving Senate party leader in U.S. history, said in a floor speech that his "current term in the Senate will be my last."

• "Regardless of the political storms that may wash over this chamber ... I assure our colleagues that I will depart with great hope for the endurance of the Senate as an institution," he said.
• The Kentuckian made no public indication of who he may support to replace him — though his endorsement may not help in Trump's GOP.

State of play: Former state Attorney General Daniel Cameron, the unsuccessful GOP nominee for governor in 2023, responded quickly by launching his campaign to succeed McConnell.

• "Kentucky, it's time for a new generation of leadership in the U.S. Senate. Let's do this," Cameron said in a post on X, along with a logo making clear he is running for U.S. Senate.
• Rep. Andy Barr (R-Ky.) also released a statement saying he's "considering running for Senate" and is "encouraged by the outpouring of support and my family and I will be making a decision about our future soon."
• Both men previously worked for McConnell — Barr as a college intern and Cameron as the senator's legal counsel.

Yes, but: Other prominent Kentucky politicians just as rapidly took themselves out of the running.

• Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear, seen as one of the only Democrats who could seriously contest the seat, is "not running for Senate," his spokesperson Eric Hyers said in a post on X.
• House Oversight Committee chair James Comer (R-Ky.) "will not be running for Senate in 2026 but is strongly considering a run for Governor in 2027," his spokesperson Austin Hacker told Axios in a statement.
• Rep. Morgan McGarvey (D-Ky.) is also not running for the seat, a source familiar with his thinking told Axios.

Zoom in: National Democrats are signaling plans to potentially target Barr's U.S. House seat should he vacate it to run for Senate.

• "KY-06 could become a competitive race with a strong Democratic candidate and with Trump's approval numbers starting to sink," House Majority PAC spokesperson C.J. Warnke told Axios.
• The Democratic PAC already had the Barr's seat as one of its "districts to watch" — though it went for President Trump last year by nearly 27 percentage points. Barr hasn't faced a serious challenge since the 2018 Democratic wave election.
• Torunn Sinclair, a spokesperson for Republicans' Congressional Leadership Fund, told Axios: "Democrats have no shot here. President Trump remains extraordinarily popular in Kentucky, while Democrats are in constant disarray and have dismal approval numbers."

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) is telling his members to bring guests to President Trump's address to Congress next month who have been negatively impacted by the administration, Axios has learned.

Why it matters: The March 4 address will be the first Trump has given to Congress since taking office — and it could make or break his efforts to pass a major fiscal package.

• Trump is encountering early headwinds as some in his party bristle at DOGE's efforts to upend the federal government and at his recent comments on Ukraine.
• With a roughly one-seat margin in the House, he will have little room for error.

Driving the news: On a virtual caucus call on Wednesday, swing-district Rep. Steven Horsford (D-Nev.) asked for messaging guidance for the speech, according to three members who were on the call.

• Jeffries responded that members should bring guests to the speech who have been hurt by DOGE or will be hurt by the budget congressional Republicans are proposing, the lawmakers told Axios.
• The suggestion comes as Jeffries' messaging arm has been instructing members for weeks to hold events in their districts with constituents who have been directly affected by the administration's cuts.

Between the lines: It is common for lawmakers to bring guests to State of the Union addresses and other presidential speeches to Congress with a political or policy agenda in mind.

• Typically, however, the topics are disparate and driven by an individual member's pet issues.
• But Democrats are unusually unified around opposing DOGE and the GOP budget as their grassroots base pushes them to do everything within their power to push back.

Zoom out: Jeffries argued on the call that Trump's polling numbers and economic fundamentals are sagging, casting it as a reversal since his November election win, lawmakers told Axios.

• The Democratic leader told members to keep hammering the GOP in their districts ahead of Congress' return to session next week.
• House Judiciary Committee ranking member Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) also told colleagues that House Democrats' litigation task force is tracking 75 lawsuits against the administration and that the "forces of democracy" are already winning a dozen cases.

Editor's note: This article has been updated with further details from the call.

As the Trump administration continues its crusade to pare down the federal job rolls and slash federal spending, some Republicans on Capitol Hill are growing unnerved by what they see as an imprecise exercise.

Why it matters: The job and funding cuts are now hitting GOP lawmakers' districts and states. There's also a larger conflict brewing over whether the administration can simply bypass Congress on these decisions.

• DOGE's efforts to shutter the U.S. Agency for International Development, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and other agencies could bring matters to a head, one House Republican told Axios.
• "I think you're going to see a clash when they ... start abolishing [agencies]," the lawmaker said. "Say like USAID, right? We authorized that. That's a creature of Congress."
• "If they try to do something like that, then you're going to get into a constitutional argument or crisis."

Driving the news: DOGE's spree of job cuts is starting to target federal roles that even some of Trump's Republican allies in Congress may deem too essential to sacrifice.

• That includes the Federal Aviation Administration firing several hundred of its 45,000 employees amid a string of fear-inducing plane crashes.
• The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, which runs the National Weather Service and helps combat natural disasters, is also on the chopping block, Axios' Andrew Freedman and Ben Geman reported.
• The administration even fired over 300 workers at the National Nuclear Security Administration — which manages the U.S. nuclear arsenal — but has since scrambled to reinstate most of them, according to CNN.

What they're saying: Senate Appropriations Committee Chair Susan Collins (R-Maine) told Axios the administration is moving "too fast." She warned Elon Musk's team should wait until agency heads are confirmed and can take "a more surgical approach."

• She said some recent actions "violate restrictions that are in current law" and the team is "making mistakes," referencing the accidental firing of officials working on bird flu.
• "Before making cuts rashly, the Administration should be studying and staffing to see what the consequences are. Measure twice before cutting. They have had to backtrack multiple times," said Rep. Don Bacon (R-Neb.).
• Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) also has concerns and told Axios of her state's many federal workers: "We all want efficiencies, there is a way to do it, and the way these people have been treated has been awful in many cases. Awful."

Zoom in: Several other lawmakers, including Sens. Jerry Moran (R-Kan.) and Bill Cassidy (R-La.), have criticized the various agency layoffs as well, according to Politico.

• Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) told RadioIowa it is "a tragedy for people that are getting laid off," but that "this is an executive branch decision."
• "Congress can't do anything except complain about it," he said.

The other side: "President Trump has enjoyed broad support on his plan to ensure that taxpayer-funded programs align with the mandate the American people gave him in November," said White House spokesperson Anna Kelly.

• Kelly said that DOGE is "already uncovering waste, fraud, and abuse" and that Trump will "cut programs that do not serve the interests of the American people and keep programs that put America First."
• A White House official pointed Axios to statements of support from 17 Senate Republicans, including Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) and Whip John Barrasso (R-Wyo.).

Zoom out: While Republicans have largely applauded the swiftness of DOGE's hacking and slashing, some are quietly fuming that their Constitutional role in controlling federal funds could be steamrolled in the process.

• The House Republican who spoke anonymously warned that many conservatives are "very constitutionalist" and may be inclined to protect Congress' power if forced to do so.
• "Even though it's our guy in the White House, if there's a lot of executive overreach, we want to protect the institution of Congress," they said.

Between the lines: Despite taking a back seat in Trump's "government efficiency" drive, GOP lawmakers are not without leverage.

• Trump will need his whole party on board in Congress when it comes to passing his massive budget reconciliation bill later this year.
• In the House, Republicans have a razor-thin majority and cannot afford more than a couple of defections on a party-line bill — meaning Trump will have to keep nearly every GOP lawmaker sated.

Editor's note: This article has been updated with comments from the White House.