Rep. Kathy Manning is the latest North Carolina Democrat to forgo a reelection bid in the wake of an aggressive Republican gerrymander.

The GOP-controlled state legislature earlier this year approved a new congressional map that could flip as many as four seats Democrats currently represent. The districts held by Manning, along with Reps. Jeff Jackson and Wiley Nickel, now favor Republicans, while Rep. Don Davis’ district became more competitive.

Jackson is also not running for reelection and is instead campaigning for North Carolina attorney general. Davis is the only one to announce a reelection bid, while Nickel has said that he won’t make a decision until the “courts have spoken.”

A suit was filed over the map earlier this week. The state’s filing deadline is Dec. 15.

Tommy Tuberville spent months casting himself as the Senate’s anti-abortion martyr. Now that he’s dropped the torch, nobody is looking to pick it up.

Tuberville’s months-long blockade of military promotions not only failed to prompt a change in the Biden administration abortion policy it was designed to protest — it also failed to rally his fellow conservatives behind pursuit of abortion restrictions through new legislation or other tactics. As the entire GOP flounders without a unified approach to the issue in the aftermath of Roe v. Wade’s demise, Tuberville’s stand appears to have had no effect.

“Look, I’m a realist. I recognize that a Senate controlled by Chuck Schumer is not going to do anything on the abortion issue,” Sen. J.D. Vance (R-Ohio) said.

Even the heaps of praise that anti-abortion groups piled on Tuberville as the gold standard did not inspire much within the GOP. Senate Republicans say they’re resigned to the reality that his one-man campaign didn’t work.

“I don’t know of a strategy at this point. I don’t know about tactics at this point,” Sen. Kevin Cramer (R-S.D.) said of Republicans’ abortion strategy. “I don’t have any plans to address it, other than just keep trying to change the policy.”

Abortion has largely become a losing issue for Republicans since the Supreme Court overturned Roe last year. State referendums on abortion have overwhelmingly skewed toward protecting or expanding access. Voter interest in abortion access is credited with helping Democrats only narrowly lose the House when pollsters projected a blowout.

Just last month, Democratic Gov. Andy Beshear won reelection in deep-red Kentucky after running heavily on abortion.

Which means that any further efforts to push abortion limits now could easily turn into a political gift for Democrats. So while they’re on the precipice of taking back the majority in 2024, Senate Republicans aren’t interested in following Tuberville.

“We’ll look for opportunities, but that’s a tough one when we’re in the minority,” Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) said.

Republicans had hoped to see the final defense policy bill preserve House-backed language blocking the Pentagon abortion policy that Tuberville was protesting, but it did not survive when a final bicameral agreement finally got released this week.

If that language rolling back the policy to reimburse service members for abortion-related travel gets stripped, Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) said before the final bill emerged, “I do want to reassess and see what comes next.”

Some Republicans pinpointed Sen. Lindsey Graham’s (R-S.C.) 15-week abortion ban as, perhaps, the next big focus for anti-abortion conservatives. That bill, introduced after the Supreme Court’s reversal of Roe, went nowhere and gave fodder to Democratic campaigns that claimed Republicans would try and enact a national abortion ban.

Graham has yet to reintroduce the legislation this Congress.

“The Republican Party needs to have a position on late term abortions,” Graham said. “We should be in the camp of not only criticizing the Democratic position of abortion on demand up to the moment of birth, but offering an alternative that puts us in line with a civilized world.”

Still, self-proclaimed realists like Vance aren’t sure that proposal would make a difference : “I’d be shocked if that got a vote, at least in this Senate,” he said.

And while anti-abortion groups have thanked Tuberville for his efforts, it’s unclear if they’ve pressed any other Senate Republicans to pick up the mantle.

“We will be calling on members of the House and Senate to prioritize protecting military funds for military families,” said Kristan Hawkins, president of Student for Life, which had backed Tuberville’s holds.

The GOP-controlled House remains friendlier territory for anti-abortion policy. But given the shrinking Republican margins caused by the expulsion of former Rep. George Santos (R-N.Y.) and former Speaker Kevin McCarthy’s early retirement, the prospects of passing abortion legislation in the House are uncertain at best.

Tuberville himself isn’t giving up. On Wednesday evening, he said he wouldn’t impose any more holds. Hundreds of the nominees he’d previously blocked were quickly confirmed on Tuesday.

Asked about any further plans for abortion action this Congress, Tuberville replied: “We’re working on something. It’s hard when you just get kicked in the teeth.”

In fact, he suggested that any new moves on abortion might be designed to get bipartisan buy-in.

It would be ideal to “get something to get them either on the record or get them to do the right thing,” Tuberville said of Democrats.

But after Tuberville snarled the military for months using Senate rules, Democrats are still concerned that another Republican could emulate him. Several Republican candidates endorsed Tuberville’s holds — signaling that potential future senators see the tactics as an opportunity.

But after 10 months of holds ended with no policy benefits for Tuberville, some Democrats hope he serves as a deterrent.

“I think people will think twice moving forward” with future blockades, said Sen. Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.).

As stalled immigration negotiations imperil U.S. aid to Ukraine and Israel, Sen. John Fetterman (D-Pa.) is blaming not only Republicans but also members of his own party for what he described as a reflexive political resistance to a border security deal.

“I hope Democrats can understand that it isn’t xenophobic to be concerned about the border,” Fetterman said in an interview. “It’s a reasonable conversation, and Democrats should engage.”

Fetterman, a progressive favorite, urged Democrats to acknowledge the large numbers of migrants streaming across the southern border. He cited the nearly 270,000 border encounters that U.S. Customs and Border Protection reported in September.

“Honestly, it’s astonishing. And this isn’t a Fox News kind of statistic. This is the government’s,” he said. “You essentially have Pittsburgh showing up there at the border.”

His remarks come as Democrats increasingly stiff-arm the border talks for skewing too far toward GOP demands — and they’re even more striking given his status as a longtime vocal advocate for immigrants. His wife, Gisele Fetterman, was a so-called “Dreamer” who came to the U.S. from Brazil when she was seven years old, a story he highlighted in a video during his 2022 Senate primary. (She became a citizen in 2009.)

The senator’s comments also demonstrate the degree to which he has positioned himself as a staunch ally to Israel during its war in Gaza, an outlook that has deeply frustrated his progressive allies. Fetterman, whose office is adorned with the Israeli flag and a “We Stand With Ukraine” poster, said he is “appalled” that Congress is considering “fucking over” the two countries.

He did not name specific concessions he would suggest making in negotiations with Republicans, saying that he doesn’t want to “paint myself into a corner” ahead of a deal. He did make clear that one red line for him is Dreamers: He would not support any legislation that puts them in harm’s way.

Fetterman added that he remains “perhaps the most pro-immigration member of the Senate” and that the GOP can’t expect to get everything they want in immigration talks. He bashed the House Republican border bill, which that chamber’s GOP leaders have insisted on including in any deal as an “OnlyFans wish list” for the opposing party.

Even as he dinged his colleagues, Fetterman acknowledged how complicated immigration reform is.

“I haven’t met anyone that can have a really crisp, cogent solution or easy solution on, ‘Well, what do you do when you have roughly a city similar in size of Pittsburgh coming up to the border?’” he said.

A compromise defense policy bill unveiled late Wednesday includes a House-passed requirement that more U.S. military hardware be made in America, nixing a stricter Senate-passed requirement.

Negotiators adopted language from Rep. Donald Norcross (D-N.J.) that would codify into law an executive order by President Joe Biden on domestic content requirements and state explicitly that those requirements cover major defense programs.

Who won: The language is a win for Biden, who days after his inauguration in 2021 signed an executive order that said 60 percent of each product bought with taxpayer dollars must contain components from the U.S., ramping up to a final target of 75 percent in 2029.

It’s also a win for U.S. allies. The provision includes an exemption for countries that have agreements with the U.S. to ease trade barriers between the countries for military equipment.

Big backers: The Norcross provision has been endorsed by the AFL-CIO, America’s largest federation of unions; the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers; and the Union Veterans Council.

The Defense MoU Attachés Group — an association of 25 foreign military attachés and officials whose countries have special reciprocal trade agreements with Washington — initially opposed the Norcross language but took a neutral stance on it after the carveout for allies was added.

Who lost: Negotiators rejected harsher language from Sen. Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.), which would have required that by 2033, every Navy ship uses 100 percent domestically produced materials, such as propulsion systems, shipboard components, couplings, shafts and support bearings.

Baldwin’s home state includes Fincantieri Marinette Marine, a major shipbuilder.

That language was backed by the American Shipbuilding Suppliers Association and Wisconsin companies Appleton Marine and Fairbanks Morse.

The U.S. defense industry mostly opposes domestic content requirements because it fears allies may reciprocate by shutting out American firms and that costs of defense products made in America could rise. The Aerospace Industries Association, which represents 340 U.S. firms, didn’t reference either provision but opposes the principle.

“Aggressive domestic sourcing requirements like Buy America hinder our relationships with partners and allies, impact our ability to improve supply chain resiliency with global partners, and contribute growing inflation, and we hope Congress considers this as they finalize year-end legislation,” AIA’s Vice President for International Affairs Dak Hardwick said in a recent statement.

Sen. Chris Murphy is expecting a new border security offer from Republicans on Thursday and further talks, possibly through the weekend, if his GOP counterparts move on their position.

“I’m willing to talk about it if it’s something that can get Democratic votes,” Murphy (D-Conn.) told reporters. “Right now, there’s no question you need a huge number of Democratic votes, especially in the House, to pass the kind of package that Senate Republicans are envisioning.”

The comments come after a failed Senate vote on Wednesday to advance a supplemental package that would contain aid to Ukraine, Israel and Taiwan, as well as Republican insisted-upon border policy changes.

“Sometimes there are moments when this place can’t fail. This feels like one of those moments,” Murphy said. “The fate of the world — the fate of Ukraine and Israel — hangs in the balance.”

That comes as Sen. James Lankford (R-Okla.), the leading GOP negotiator, indicated he would continue “swapping paper” on border security offers and said he’d keep fighting for a deal.

“We have to be able to get stuff done,” he told reporters. “We’re doing Israel security, Ukraine security and what’s happening overseas. Those are serious issues.”

The Oklahoma Republican said he’s still awaiting a hard deadline for delivering the new funds from the White House, but will be “working through the weekend on this” in hopes of reaching an agreement on a package.

He also suggested it’s still possible to finish a bill before the end of the month, which would require canceling some of a recess expected to start at the end of next week.

The House voted mostly along party lines to formally reprimand Rep. Jamaal Bowman over triggering a fire alarm last September, the latest episode of the GOP’s censure ire.

The measure passed by a 214-191-5 vote. Bowman (D-N.Y.) is the third Democrat that Republicans have voted to censure this year. Three Democrats from purple districts voted for the censure: Reps. Jahana Hayes (Conn.), Chris Pappas (N.H.) and Marie Gluesenkamp Perez (Wash.).

“This is an insult to the people I was elected to represent,” Bowman said Wednesday evening on the House floor. “Instead of passing meaningful legislation, some Republicans are using this to waste our time and money and to make you forget about all of the rights they want to destroy.”

Following the vote, Bowman stood in the well of the House to receive the formal reprimand, surrounded by members of the caucus from across the ideological spectrum. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) shouted at Republicans in the chamber: “You’ve got to fund the government!”

Democratic leadership and Bowman’s progressive allies had all lined up on the House floor Wednesday evening to defend him against the motion, slamming it as a waste of time. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries derided it as “fake, fraudulent and fictitious.”

Bowman already pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor charge for pulling the fire alarm in a House office building during a chaotic vote on government funding at the end of September. The lawmaker had also agreed to pay the maximum fine, but some House Republicans who’d been incensed by Bowman’s actions demanded further punishment. Some on the right have charged that Bowman triggered the alarm to obstruct or delay the House proceedings that day, though he’s maintained he did not intentionally set off the alarm.

The House Ethics Committee, which is evenly split between Republicans and Democrats, had also declined to take any further action on Bowman.

Censures have become more common practice in the House in recent years. Earlier this term, Republicans also moved to punish Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) for his handling of investigations into former President Donald Trump and Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.) over her outspoken criticism of the Israeli government.

The censure comes at a time of some political vulnerability for the New York Democrat. Westchester County Executive George Latimer kicked off a primary challenge against Bowman earlier in the week in what is expected to be a hotly contested race.

Senate Republicans on Wednesday blocked further debate on a $100 billion-plus proposal to aid Ukraine, Israel and Taiwan — which also includes border funding — citing its lack of stricter border policy changes.

The mostly party-line 49-51 vote did not reach the 60-vote threshold to continue debate on the bill. The Senate GOP for weeks threatened to stop it from advancing absent an agreement to add more conservative border policy changes. But those border talks, which recently stalled, are still significantly short of a deal.

Congressional leaders signaled they aren’t giving up on passing more aid money, but it’s tough to see a path forward since Republicans have said they won’t clear it without significant border policy adjustments.

“You’re not going to find something that gets every Democrat or Republican,” Senate Minority Whip John Thune (R-S.D.) said Wednesday morning. “But we need to find something that gets hopefully the majority of both.”

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer Wednesday morning tried to barter with Republicans, suggesting they could offer a border amendment to the supplemental package before its final vote, an offer he made publicly on Tuesday that was quickly panned by Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell. Schumer said Democrats would “not interfere with the construction of that amendment” and that there would be no conditions — but it would have to pass at a 60-vote threshold.

“It’s they who have injected border into the Ukraine issue, even though the two are unrelated. And now they’re getting a golden opportunity to offer border at 60 votes,” Schumer said. “If that is not good enough for them, then what are they doing?”

McConnell made clear that wouldn’t fly with Republicans and they still planned to block the supplemental spending bill.

“I’ve spent months highlighting the undeniable links between the threats we face in Europe, in the Middle East, and in the Indo-Pacific,” McConnell said on the floor Wednesday morning. “But Democratic leadership appears to be telling us today that they’re willing to risk each of these urgent priorities to avoid fixing our own borders right here at home.”

Speaker Mike Johnson has backed tying support for the the supplemental to border policy changes as well, especially given conservative opposition to sending more money to Ukraine could tank any bill in the House otherwise. That’s bolstered some Senate Republicans who’ve framed this as a must-have.

“We believe that securing our own homeland, protecting American citizens should take precedence,” said Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.).

The Senate is slated to head out of town Thursday and only has one more week of session scheduled until the new year. Senate Democratic leadership had hoped to pass the supplemental package before the holiday break.

At this point, that timeline is looking increasingly unlikely. While the White House has struck an especially urgent tone for Ukraine cash, saying it’s imperative if Ukraine is going to keep countering Russia, it’s not clear when, exactly, that funding would run out.

The U.S. has $4.66 billion left in presidential drawdown authority for Ukraine, which is how America transfers weapons directly to the battlefield. And there is also $1.1 billion in existing resources available to backfill U.S. stocks.

“We may reach a point where we cannot sustain the current level of security assistance support to Ukraine but until we get to that point, if ever, our spending decisions are informed by multiple factors, including Ukraine’s immediate needs, equipment availability, and our capacity to replenish resources, ensuring that our aid is both strategic and sustainable,” said DOD spokesperson Maj. Charlie Dietz.

Lara Seligman contributed to this report.

The United States’ commitment to Ukraine took a devastating blow on the Senate floor on Wednesday. Senators insist the saga isn’t over quite yet.

Both parties quickly moved to resuscitate border negotiations that could clear the way for delivering tens of billions of dollars to U.S. allies Ukraine and Israel after the GOP blocked President Joe Biden’s spending request on Wednesday afternoon. Republicans are expected to make a new offer to Democrats, which Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) said could bring his party back to the negotiating table.

“This is not the end,” said Sen. James Lankford (R-Okla.), the top GOP negotiator. “Reset and say: ‘Let’s keep doing the work.’”

Still, there’s no clear pathway forward and Democrats and Republicans alike are throwing around ideas to unstick negotiations. The impasse boils down to Democrats being unwilling to enact the type of restrictive border policies that Republicans prefer and the GOP arguing the Democratic concessions so far — mostly on asylum — would barely decrease migrant flows.

Republicans have insisted they’ll only greenlight aid for Ukraine, Israel and Taiwan if they get a deal to tighten border restrictions. There’s a long way to go on that front, but if there’s any silver lining from Wednesday’s face plant of a vote, it’s that senators haven’t given up yet.

What’s more, President Joe Biden cracked the door open to further Democratic concessions, declaring Wednesday he is “willing to make significant compromises” and praising the baritone, even-keeled Lankford as a “decent guy.” In a best-case scenario, those comments and prodding from leadership from both parties to finish the job could unstick stalled negotiations.

“I hope there’s an agreement to go back to the negotiating table and to put in place negotiators who are charged with getting an agreement. I don’t think we do have that now,” said Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.). “The important thing is to have leadership provide a directive to get this done.”

Still, there’s certainly an enthusiasm gap between Lankford and Murphy, who along with Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (I-Ariz.) are now guiding the talks. Murphy said the forthcoming GOP offer would determine whether the talks resume since they fell apart nearly a week ago.

“If the room is just a forum to make unreasonable demands, then I’ve got other things I can do with my time,” Murphy said. “But if we’re actually going to sit down and negotiate, and Republicans are going to move and we’re going to move, then let’s sit down and talk.”

Lankford said processing asylum claims much more quickly and cutting down mass release of migrants into the United States are must-haves for Republicans. Asked why he was more optimistic than his Democratic partner, Lankford cracked: “Maybe he needs more ice cream. … He is committed to getting an outcome.”

Still, someone’s going to have to blink. Democrats are resisting full-scale border security policy changes demanded by Republicans that would reshape asylum, parole and detention law — and everyone’s got their own ideas.

Sen. Michael Bennet (D-Colo.), who has been involved in the bipartisan negotiations, suggested that Biden and Minority Leader Mitch McConnell should cut a deal. Republicans are pushing Biden himself to get more personally involved and some negotiators believe that the White House may be more willing to compromise than congressional Democratic leaders.

Sen. Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.) said Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas has in meetings endorsed some of the policies Republicans are pushing, while Senate Minority Whip John Thune (R-S.D.) said clinching a deal will require a “higher level of engagement” with the White House.

“It’s going to require their involvement this time,” Bennet said of McConnell and Biden, longtime Senate colleagues. “I’ve had conversations this morning with Republicans, I’m having conversations this afternoon with Republicans. None of those discussions are going away.”

And Lankford acknowledged that he, Murphy and Sinema can only get things to a certain point, but Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, McConnell, Speaker Mike Johnson and Biden can finish the deal and sign off on it. Lankford said he’s working with both the White House staff and Johnson’s staff to try and find middle ground with Murphy and Sinema.

Still, it’s a tough moment to reset, given the raw emotions over the failed test vote on Wednesday set up by Schumer. The Senate is slated to go on recess for the holidays at the end of next week, though many senators said they hoped the Senate would try to finish the work before the end of the year.

There is a full week scheduled for recess before Christmas, and if negotiations keep plodding along, some senators think the chamber should use it.

“If I gotta be here on fucking Christmas Day I will, because Ukraine funding needs to be done. I’m willing to stay here 24/7 to get it done,” said Sen. Jon Tester (D-Mont.).

Jennifer Haberkorn and Anthony Adragna contributed to this report.

Congress is preparing to extend its deadline for untangling a complicated fight over warrantless government surveillance – which will mean yet another headache for House GOP leaders.

Top lawmakers are attaching a short-term extension of the government wiretapping power known as Section 702 to a sweeping defense policy bill, according to seven aides and lawmakers familiar with the text of the bill.

The extension would give Congress until April 19 to figure out how to reauthorize Section 702, named for its specific section of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. The provision is meant to target foreigners abroad but has long stoked controversy for its ability to sweep in Americans.

Whether to attach a surveillance powers extension was one of the final sticking points on the defense bill, whose text is now finalized and expected to be released later Wednesday. Both the House and Senate still need to pass the defense bill, and there is bipartisan backlash already brewing over the decision to attach a surveillance extension.

Conservatives privately urged Speaker Mike Johnson to separate the two issues. His decision not to do so promises to complicate a final vote on the defense bill, a typically must-pass proposal that could come to the House floor as soon as next week.

“This was a total sell-out of conservative principles and a huge win for Democrats,” Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) tweeted of the defense deal, pointing to the surveillance extension among other provisions as reasons she would be opposed.

But the extension will give the House time to resolve his chamber’s two competing long-term overhaul proposals for the surveillance authority: one from the Judiciary Committee and one from the Intelligence Committee.

Both bills would make major changes to Section 702, such as limiting the number of FBI personnel who are able to conduct searches and imposing new penalties for surveillance violations. The bills also would implement new auditing and reporting requirements for the program, as well as change the larger surveillance law the authority is housed under as well as a related surveillance court that fields requests for wiretapping power.

But the two committees have split over when a warrant should be required for searching 702-collected data for Americans’ information.

The Intelligence Committee bill would require a warrant for so-called “evidence of a crime” searches, which aren’t related to foreign intelligence and comprise a small subset of searches. The committee is expected to easily advance its bill on a bipartisan basis on Thursday.

“I think it’s going to pass unanimously. I think it’s a fabulous product. I think it’s the answer to solve the problem,” Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick (R-Pa.), a member of the panel, told POLITICO.

Meanwhile, the House Judiciary Committee on Wednesday advanced its own sweeping bill on a 35-2 vote.

“I know our approach will have its critics. … [But] I believe we have struck the right balance here and perhaps the only balance that can pass the House at this time,” Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.) said about the bill.

The Judiciary bill would impose a warrant requirement for searching 702-collected data for Americans’ information. However, it builds in exceptions including for “emergency situations,” if an individual has consented to the search or for some cybersecurity-related searches.

The legislation also makes broader surveillance reforms, including preventing data brokers from being able to sell consumer information to law enforcement.

The two no votes on Wednesday came from Democratic Reps. Eric Swalwell (Calif.) and Hank Johnson (Ga.).

“This bill ignores the extensive remedial measures the FBI and the Justice Department has taken,” Swalwell said.

John Sakellariadis and Connor O’Brien contributed.