House Republicans are planning a conference meeting early next week to try to privately work out a longstanding split on how to change a controversial surveillance authority.

GOP leadership told members there would be an all-members meeting Monday night to discuss reauthorizing Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, which expires at the end of the year. The authority is meant to target foreigners’ communications, but has stirred controversy as it also sweeps up Americans’ information.

The party hopes to iron out their remaining differences for an hour ahead of House votes, according to a Republican familiar with the planning. That gathering is in addition to the typical weekly Republican conference meeting Tuesday morning.

The Section 702 meeting comes after the Judiciary and Intelligence Committees advanced competing bills to reauthorize the law. Both bills are expected to come to the floor next week, effectively letting the House decide in real time which one gets sent to the Senate. While the two bills are similar, the Judiciary legislation includes a much broader warrant requirement to obtain Americans’ information, which some security hawks have branded unwieldy. It also makes sweeping changes that go well beyond just Section 702, including preventing data brokers from selling consumer information to law enforcement.

“My intention is to bring the bills … to the floor under a special rule that provides members a fair opportunity to vote in favor of their preferred measure,” Speaker Mike Johnson wrote to his conference.

David Cameron brought immigration warnings about Europe’s populist uprising to Washington this week — just as senators are trying to negotiate a border security deal.

The former British prime minister, now foreign secretary, was dispatched Washington this week for meetings with top lawmakers. He told senators that he knows from his own experience how potent voter backlash over immigration can become.

“He said, these governments one after the other been falling on the left and on the right over immigration,” recalled Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah) in an interview. “He said he lost on Brexit because of immigration. He said, ‘If you don’t fix immigration, immigration will fix you.’”

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.