As President Donald Trump and Elon Musk lay waste to scores of federal programs and the careers of thousands of government workers, Republicans on Capitol Hill have mostly kept their objections to themselves — with one big exception.

Military veterans have been disproportionately affected by the administration’s early cuts, and GOP lawmakers have unleashed a rare tide of public pushback. That reached a crescendo this week as the Trump administration raises the possibility of large-scale dismissals of Veterans Administration employees.

Mass firings at the VA began weeks ago, spurring a flurry of panicked calls from GOP lawmakers to the White House. But a new memo outlines the potential for 80,000 more firings across a roughly 480,000-person department, according to an internal memo obtained by POLITICO.

Senate Veterans’ Affairs Chair Jerry Moran (R-Kan.) said in a statement that while the massive department is “in need of reform,” efforts to downsize “must be done in a more responsible manner,” after the AP first reported the 80,000 figure Wednesday. Moran, who has been in close contact with VA Secretary Doug Collins and White House staff about personnel issues for weeks, added in an interview Thursday that lawmakers “need information” and that the numbers need to be “justifiable.”

Leaving a lunch meeting with Musk Wednesday where the VA cuts came up, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) voiced his irritation to reporters and suggested Trump’s veterans chief needed to get a better handle on his department.

“It’s political malpractice not to consult Congress if that’s what you intend to do,” Graham said. “Maybe you’ve got a good reason to do it. I like Doug Collins — he’s a great guy. But we don’t need to be reading memos in the paper about 20 percent cut at the VA.”

Even before the VA memo became public, there was heartburn about how the cuts undertaken by Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency initiative might impact the country’s roughly 18 million veterans.

Federal job cuts generally affect veterans more profoundly, since they are given preference in government hiring. The provision of health care and other services is directly threatened by cuts to the VA, and those impacts have been a frequent concern at the spate of town hall protests GOP lawmakers have encountered in recent weeks.

There are signs the message has gotten through. Senate Majority Leader John Thune said Thursday that senators raised the issue of VA cuts directly with Musk during the lunch meeting at the Capitol on Wednesday.

“I’m hoping there will be some clarification on that issue soon,” Thune told a small group of reporters.

Sen. John Barrasso, Thune’s No. 2, said that while they didn’t get confirmation of the VA cuts, Republicans stressed to Musk that Collins needs to be involved, with “the concern being that we want to make sure that veterans get the care that they need.”

Senate Appropriations Chair Susan Collins, who has recently been in contact with Musk, said she’s also coordinating with Moran as he tries to get answers.

“We have an obligation to our veterans, and these mass firings undermine that obligation,” Collins told reporters.

Democrats, who have been searching for a political foothold as they try to fight back against DOGE, blasted the proposed VA cuts. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer called it “a betrayal of our promise to our service members” that will spark “longer wait times, fewer appointments, less health care service for our veterans.”

Across the Capitol, the more DOGE-friendly House GOP is more willing to give the administration leeway on efforts to slash the size of the federal workforce. But even GOP leaders who are normally quick to praise Musk’s slash-and-burn operation are sensitive about the VA and impacts on veterans.

“We’re going to talk to the secretary to see what their needs are,” said House Majority Leader Steve Scalise (R-La.). “You had, in a lot of these departments, a large increase during COVID, some of which may have been needed but a lot of which wasn’t justified.

“So you need to sort through what actually helps the veterans versus what actually takes money away from veterans benefits,” Scalise added.

House Foreign Affairs Chair Michael McCaul said in an interview Thursday he needed to study the VA cuts in more detail. But he had a visceral reaction when informed of the level of workforce cuts in the memo.

“Jeez,” McCaul said, his eyes widening.

“I worry because our veterans are hurting after Afghanistan; PTSD has gone way up,” McCaul added. “Suicide rates gone way up, and morale has gone way down. So I worry in the sense that I don’t want that to be a signal that we don’t care about our veterans.”

Some House Republicans, including some with a high number of veterans in their districts who get their care from the VA, offered measured support.

“I trust the president,” said Rep. Brian Babin (R-Texas), adding “there are a lot of complaints” about the VA. Rep. Austin Scott (R-Ga.) added that he had faith in Collins to make cuts that “create efficiencies and actually improve care” at VA.

But Rep. Rob Wittman (R-Va.) — a senior member of the House Armed Services Committee whose state includes large numbers of federal workers and veterans — warned the job cuts would have real impacts on his constituents.

“I think everybody looks at it and says, ‘Let’s get the federal government to the right size that’s sustainable.’ Companies do that all the time,” Wittman said. “But I also want to be mindful that these employees are really good people. They work hard, and I want to make sure we keep in mind the impact that it has on them.”

Ben Leonard, Connor O’Brien and Katherine Tully-McManus contributed to this report.

House Republicans’ campaign arm directly attacked Democratic Rep. Adriano Espaillat’s immigration status, drawing condemnation from Democrats.

“Democrats literally chose an illegal immigrant to give their response to President Trump’s address,” the National Republican Congressional Committee wrote on X on Wednesday, adding that “Democrats couldn’t be more disconnected from the American people.”

The direct attack of Espaillat, the first Dominican American member of Congress and a former undocumented immigrant, was met with a swift response from top Democrats who called the post racist.

“These people are disgusting,” House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries said on X.

Newly elected Democratic National Committee Chair Ken Martin said the GOP “isn’t even trying to hide its racism anymore.”

“With Speaker @MikeJohnson leading the charge, they wear their bigotry like a badge of honor — absolutely despicable! @RepEspaillat is a sitting member of Congress, an American citizen, and a dedicated public servant,” Martin said on X.

Sen. Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.) said “Whoever is the intern @NRCC that tweeted this racist shit needs to be fired” in his own post to X.

Espaillat delivered Democrats’ Spanish-language response to President Donald Trump’s joint address to Congress earlier this week. He and his family overstayed a tourist visa when he was a child but received green cards within a year.

Espaillat, who has now been a U.S. citizen for decades and chairs the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, has proudly labeled himself a “former undocumented immigrant turned progressive Congressman.”

The New York Democrat has also battled with Trump on immigration policies dating back to his first term.

The NRCC doubled down on its language, responding to New York Gov. Kathy Hochul calling the post “Vile, ignorant, and racist.”

“Democrats caring more about policing words and fighting facts instead of policing our border and fighting crime shows just how out of touch they are,” said NRCC spokesperson Mike Marinella, echoing the NRCC’s response to Hochul online.

Espaillat’s office did not respond to a request for comment.

Some Democrats, too, have used their political opponents’ citizenship status in recent attacks.

On Monday, Rep. Nydia Velázquez (D-N.Y.) told Elon Musk, who has led Trump’s efforts to reduce the size of the federal government, to “go back to South Africa.”

Musk was born in South Africa but has been a U.S. citizen for decades.

“It was interesting yesterday — I was watching a video of an interview of Elon Musk where he said the Italians should stay in Italy and the Chinese should stay in China. My question to Elon Musk is — what the hell are you doing here in America?” Velázquez said at a rally outside HUD, misrepresenting an interview Musk gave where he was encouraging people to have children and reverse declining birth rates.

Musk has railed against illegal immigration in the United States. He has said he supports “a highly selective immigration policy” in the U.S. and has implied immigration could lead to a loss of distinct cultures globally.

Velázquez’s comments led to a slew of condemnation from Republicans, including from the White House’s rapid response team, which called the comments “completely unhinged.”

House Democrats are making it official: Latino voters have shifted their battleground map.

Their campaign arm is unveiling its list of top battleground incumbents to defend in 2026, giving the first insight into how the party views the midterm elections — with notable new additions to reflect a shift toward President Donald Trump in some majority-Latino congressional districts

The 26-member “frontline” list provided first to POLITICO otherwise largely matches the list of districts where Democrats played defense last cycle. As Democrats continue their post-election autopsy, the list reveals where the party thinks it is most vulnerable and will have to dedicate resources to protect incumbents.

Texas Democratic Reps. Henry Cuellar and Vicente Gonzalez weren’t on the list last cycle but saw their South Texas districts, some of the most heavily Latino in the country, shift dramatically toward Trump. Rep. Dina Titus (D-Nev.) was also a new addition to the list, meaning all three Democratic House members from Nevada will be “frontliners.” Another once-safe district, the North Jersey seat held by Rep. Nellie Pou, was deep-blue territory for years but Trump won it this past cycle.

Although there are warning signs that could signal a broader shift among Latino voters away from Democrats, the party still seemed confident about its potential to capture the majority next year.

“With the cost of living still top of mind for voters, and House Republicans actively pushing disastrous policies that further increase costs, it’s clear that House Democrats are poised to retake the majority in 2026,” said Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee chair Suzan DelBene (D-Wash.) in a statement.

The DCCC list is a perennial source of heartburn — and sometimes conflict — among lawmakers who jockey to get onto the list because it helps allocate party resources and leads to a boost in fundraising and attention. With a shrinking number of competitive congressional seats, much of the list remains the same between elections, with changes based on factors such as how specific candidates performed and how presidential results emerged on a district-by-district basis.

Trump’s dominance last fall has changed the overall landscape. Thirteen Democrats now represent seats won by Trump in 2024, while only three Republicans represent seats won by former Vice President Kamala Harris. So even as the narrow House margin means Democrats only need to flip a handful of seats to win back the majority, they have to simultaneously defend many seats.

Recently flipped seats in California and New York like those held by Reps. George Whitesides, Derek Tran, Laura Gillen and Josh Riley, were also added to the list.

There were also some subtractions from last cycle’s list. Several midwestern Democrats — Reps. Angie Craig of Minnesota, Eric Sorensen and Nikki Budzinski of Illinois, and Hillary Scholten of Michigan — were removed after handily dispatching their opponents.

The full list of lawmakers:

• Josh Harder (Calif.)
• Adam Gray (Calif.)
• George Whitesides (Calif.)
• Derek Tran (Calif.)
• Dave Min (Calif.)
• Jahana Hayes (Conn.)
• Frank Mrvan (Ind.)
• Jared Golden (Maine)
• Kristen McDonald Rivet (Mich.)
• Don Davis (N.C.)
• Nellie Pou (N.J.)
• Gabe Vasquez (N.M.)
• Dina Titus (Nev.)
• Susie Lee (Nev.)
• Steven Horsford (Nev.)
• Tom Suozzi (N.Y.)
• Laura Gillen (N.Y.)
• Josh Riley (N.Y.)
• John Mannion (N.Y.)
• Marcy Kaptur (Ohio)
• Emilia Sykes (Ohio)
• Janelle Bynum (Ore.)
• Henry Cuellar (Texas)
• Vicente Gonzalez (Texas)
• Eugene Vindman (Va.)
• Marie Gluesenkamp Perez (Wash.)

The four big city mayors who testified Wednesday on Capitol Hill knew they were invited by House Republicans to be punching bags. For New York’s Eric Adams, however, the blows were thrown by fellow Democrats.

GOP lawmakers not only spared Adams from the brunt of their often-theatrical attacks on sanctuary cities, they defended him against the Democratic onslaught — including from fellow New Yorker Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. Oversight Committee Chair James Comer (R-Ky.) at one point called Adams “an outstanding mayor.”

It was the latest display of just how far through the looking-glass things have gone for Adams, who in four years has gone from the “Biden of Brooklyn” and “new face of the Democratic Party” to an unlikely ally of President Donald Trump.

That about-face — with the Trump Justice Department’s decision last month to drop a corruption case against Adams as its pivot point — fueled the Democratic attacks Wednesday at the made-for-TV hearing.

It opened with Rep. Gerry Connolly of Virginia, the panel’s top Democrat, referencing Adams’ federal case and alleged indebtedness to Trump. It deepened when other Democrats pressed Adams in increasingly aggressive terms about whether he had traded his cooperation with federal immigration officials for leniency from prosecutors.

“We have a right to know if the Trump administration has actually coerced you into agreeing to him,” Rep. Robert Garcia of California asked him. “Are you selling out New Yorkers to save yourself from prosecution?”

Ocasio-Cortez — who, like Adams, represents New York City — later rained questions on the mayor about whether he agreed to municipal policy changes that would appease Trump. Adams looked straight at her as she described the Trump administration’s decision to drop his prosecution as a “four-alarm fire” for the rule of law in the United States.

“There’s no deal, no quid pro quo, and I did nothing wrong,” Adams said in what has become his standard response to the allegation that he struck an illicit deal with Trump’s border czar Tom Homan to allow federal immigration agents into city jails in exchange for the end of his legal peril.

The dynamic set Adams far apart from the three other Democratic mayors — Denver’s Mike Johnston, Chicago’s Brandon Johnson and Boston’s Michelle Wu — who sat alongside him in a subterranean hearing room and faced feverish questioning from House Republicans seeking a viral moment.

Adams had braced for the possibility he would feature prominently in the GOP’s scrutiny of cities that had rebuffed federal immigration enforcement. Instead, Republicans largely gave the former New York City police captain a pass, often skipping over him with their rapid-fire questions.

Where the other three mayors put up a defiant and sometimes argumentative front, Adams instead followed a formula of giving succinct, unprovocative answers. He was rewarded with plenty of Republican praise.

“Mayor Adams is being attacked because he’s agreed to cooperate with federal officials to uphold the laws of the United States,” said Rep. Gary Palmer (R-Ala.).

Rep. William Timmons (R-S.C.) connected Adams’ prosecution to his criticism of former President Joe Biden: “The only one of you who stood up to the previous administration was under investigation shortly thereafter. Weird how that happens.”

And Comer praised Adams for being “willing to work with [Immigrations and Customs Enforcement] on detaining the most criminal illegals — and I want to publicly thank you for that.”

That praise alternated with combative exchanges between Democrats and the New York mayor. In one testy exchange, freshman Rep. Suhas Subramanyam of Virginia asked Adams if he had ever discussed his criminal case with Trump.

Adams paused as an attorney whispered into his ear then repeated the line: “This case is in front of Judge Ho, and out of deference to Judge Ho, I’m not going to discuss this case,” he said, referring to U.S. District Judge Dale Ho, who is now considering whether to drop the charges as the Justice Department has requested.

Subramanyam eventually dropped the line of inquiry, concluding that “Mayor Adams is not answering the question because he probably has” discussed his case with the White House.

Rep. Laura Gillen (D-N.Y.) — whose Long Island district was previously represented by Anthony D’Esposito, a Republican and former New York police officer — targeted the New York mayor with the same zeal as her more progressive colleagues, calling on him at one point to resign.

Her attacks provoked Adams to retort, “Thank God you don’t live in New York City.”

The bear hug from congressional Republicans, meanwhile, does Adams no favors when it comes to his political future. He faces a narrowing path to reelection this year with the criminal case and Trump’s mass deportation agenda looming over the country’s largest sanctuary city.

Democrats were not in the mood to do him any favors. Garcia came with posters of former U.S. Attorney Danielle Sassoon’s resignation letter condemning the decision to drop charges against him and of Homan praising Adams in a joint Fox News interview.

Weighing in from afar was Homan himself, who wrote on X that “Mayor Adams is trying to protect New Yorkers from violent illegal aliens” as he watched the hearing.

Adams appeared disengaged at times. When Connolly laid into him at the top of the hearing, he looked off to the side, then looking forward again and sipping his tea after the Virginia Democrat moved on. As other Democrats pressed him for answers, he flipped through a briefing book as he mounted his defense.

In his own opening statement, Adams leaned heavily on his experience as a law enforcement official and sought to push back on the notion that his approach to immigration and crime has changed since Trump won a second term.

“You know me, I’m the same mayor,” he told reporters before the hearing. “Three things stay on my mind all the time: public safety, public safety, public safety. We have to have a safe city.”