Tag

Slider

Browsing

Northern Virginia Democrats slammed a new House GOP proposal to rename the Washington-area Dulles International Airport after former President Donald Trump.

At issue is a brief two-page proposal, introduced by Rep. Guy Reschenthaler (R-Pa.) on March 29 with half a dozen additional GOP co-sponsors, that would rename the facility the “Donald J. Trump International Airport.”

“Donald Trump is facing 91 felony charges. If Republicans want to name something after him, I’d suggest they find a federal prison,” Fairfax-area Rep. Gerry Connolly (D-Va.) said in a statement to POLITICO.

He wasn’t alone in the criticism. Rep. Don Beyer (D-Va.) recalled the day Trump enacted his executive order barring entry to individuals from certain majority-Muslim countries in 2017 — and that lawmakers went to Dulles to press for legal representation for detainees.

“I also remember Republicans like those who just introduced legislation to rename that airport after Trump hiding and giving mealy mouthed responses when asked about the chaos and suffering Trump’s bigotry caused,” he said in a statement. “They know our airport will never be named after Trump, but that’s not the point — the point is to suck up to their Dear Leader.”

Asked if he had any response to the legislation, an aide to Sen. Mark Warner (D-Va.) replied: “lol.”

The airport, the closest with international flights to the Capitol, is currently named for influential former Secretary of State John Foster Dulles, but is routinely derided by area travelers over its customer experience.

Mitch McConnell plans to keep fighting his party’s “isolationist movement” — even after he steps down as GOP leader.

The Kentucky Republican, who is leading the hawkish wing’s drive to fund Ukraine, said in an interview with WHAS’s Terry Meiners that continuing to push for a brawny national security approach will be a major priority over the rest of his time in the Senate. McConnell’s term ends at the end of 2026, two years after he plans to give up his leadership post, and he said he’ll serve it out in full.

“I’m particularly involved in actually fighting back against the isolationist movement in my own party. And some in the other as well. And the symbol of that lately is: Are we going to help Ukraine or not?” McConnell said. “I’ve got this sort of on my mind for the next couple years as something I’m going to focus on.”

Asked about his divergent view with fellow Kentucky Republican Sen. Rand Paul, who opposes foreign aid and sending more money to Ukraine to fend off Russia, McConnell said they’ve never agreed on foreign policy and that Paul “would be the first one to say that he’s an isolationist.” The bigger problem, McConnell added, is that more of his conference is agreeing with Paul’s view; roughly half the Senate Republicans voted for the foreign aid bill and its $60 billion in Ukraine funding.

That means many of his own members are now opting against sending Ukraine money.

“What’s made it more troublesome is, it seems to me, others are heading in that direction, making arguments that are easily refuted. We’re not losing any of our troops, the Ukrainians are the ones doing the fighting,” McConnell said. “If the Russians take Ukraine, some NATO country would be next and then we will be right in the middle of it.”

The Senate’s Ukraine bill faces an uncertain path in the House, where Speaker Mike Johnson said he supports additional funding but may devise his own approach. It doesn’t help that former President Donald Trump is no cheerleader for Ukraine aid, either.

McConnell offered a somewhat tepid endorsement of Trump in March but has generally steered clear of talking about the former president. He did not deviate from that approach on Monday. Asked if he’s spoken to Trump, McConnell said: “I’ve got my hands full dealing with the Senate.”

“Biden’s got problems too. Both these candidates don’t score very well with the public. One of them’s going to win. What am I going to do? I’m going to concentrate on trying to turn my job over to the next majority leader,” McConnell said.

And, of course, make sure Ukraine doesn’t go empty-handed in its defense against Russia.

Speaker Mike Johnson has hit on a new ingredient in his search for a winning formula to muscle long-stalled foreign aid through the House — a task that will require winning over enough fellow Republicans who are skeptical or even against more help for Ukraine.

Johnson’s latest idea: Linking any foreign aid deal to rolling back President Joe Biden’s pause on natural gas exports. If Republicans could claim they’d extracted a concession that undercuts Biden’s climate agenda, the thinking goes, they’d have a rare unifying message heading into the election. Boosting U.S. natural gas exports would also allow the GOP to argue it had achieved direct progress on countering Russia.

Even so, it’s already looking like Johnson won’t make much headway with the loudest corners of his right flank with the gas exports pitch. GOP sources we chatted with acknowledged that getting a win on natural gas would help sweeten the pot — after all, House Republicans passed legislation in February that would have ended Biden’s export pause. But Johnson’s hard-line conservatives are likely to look for more from him to quell their anger over a possible Ukraine vote.

To be clear, no policy details are locked in yet for the House GOP’s Ukraine plan, as Johnson tries to figure out what can gel. But we’ve heard about three problems with the LNG idea so far: 

Gas exports are not a big enough prize to offset having to vote for Ukraine aid for those who are deeply opposed or view it as toxic to the base. A certain level of opposition will be baked into the chaos-driven House GOP conference, but it’s possible that any energy rollback would fail to get traction.
That’s because border security remains the must-tackle issue for many on Johnson’s right, despite their distaste for the Senate’s bipartisan attempt to do just that earlier this year.
To some Republicans, choosing gas exports as a concession looks too much like a personal win for Johnson even though it’s got a direct link to combating Russia, given the boost to energy producers in his home state of Louisiana, versus a genuine win for House Republicans. (Louisiana would definitely benefit; so would other states like Texas and Georgia, among others.) 

“The $1.9-trillion deficit that just passed wasn’t nearly big enough. To spend more, maybe we could secure some other borders instead of our own? Billions for Ukraine, billions for Israel, billions for Taiwan. When Congress gets back next week maybe try harder to bankrupt America faster,” Rep. Warren Davidson (R-Ohio) quipped on X Monday.

It’s not just LNG, of course. Johnson is eyeing other items to make Ukraine aid somewhat more palatable to his members — though, we reiterate, none of this is locked in. They include potentially making part of any new Ukraine aid a “loan” — details are still being worked out, but Republicans have discussed conditions on how additional humanitarian aid is structured, in particular.

Unfortunately, there’s already GOP pushback on that front, too. Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas), for one, suggested that Johnson’s discussions about restructuring Ukraine money doesn’t address the underlying reticence on his right flank.

“No matter the smoke and mirrors for Ukraine funding — it will perpetuate war with no defined mission and will abandon leverage to secure the border of the United States, unless it doesn’t,” Roy said.

Johnson doesn’t need unity among House Republicans to get Ukraine aid passed, as long as he gets a healthy amount of Democratic buy-in. Trying to unravel elements of Biden’s energy plan puts that Democratic support at risk.

But so far, Democratic leaders aren’t killing the idea. A spokesperson for House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries did not immediately respond to a request for comment on Johnson’s broader proposal.

Only nine House Democrats voted for a bill in February that would have overridden Biden and un-paused natural gas exports. Even if Johnson goes narrower with language he tries to add to the foreign aid package, he’ll definitely lose climate hawks who would ordinarily be staunch supporters of Ukraine, think Reps. Sean Casten (D-Ill.) and Jared Huffman (D-Calif.), who’ve made addressing climate change a focus of their tenures in Washington.

Huffman called the potential inclusion of LNG provisions “absurd” in an interview with POLITICO.

“The only thing it really shows is that Mike Johnson cares a lot more about LNG than he does Ukraine,” the California Democrat said, adding of Johnson: “He’s been flailing for some time now. … It’s certainly not something that takes us closer to a solution.”

That’s how Casten sees the situation as well. Though members from both parties wondered Monday if Johnson’s idea was fully baked or if he was just testing the waters.

“Why would you even put this in there? You’re not doing it to gain Democrats. Maybe you’re doing it because you’re afraid of Marjorie Taylor Greene and, if that’s the case, get the hell out of the leadership role,” Casten said in a Monday interview.

Indeed, the volume of GOP complaints he gets on Ukraine aid could have ramifications for another fight Johnson is navigating — the threatened ouster vote that the Georgia firebrand Greene teed up last month.

Johnson’s allies are largely downplaying Greene, but he can’t afford to dismiss her gambit given his shrinking majority. While the two have exchanged texts over the break and are expected to speak early next week, Greene blasted Johnson’s latest Ukraine aid comments on Monday.

Importantly, Johnson flirted with the natural gas exports idea during a Fox News interview on Sunday, but he’s been light enough on the specifics of his Ukraine strategy that he may yet look at another aspect of Biden’s energy agenda. The same goes for any conditions on the Ukraine funds.

Asked for additional details on Monday, Johnson’s office referred back to his Fox News interview.

Rep. Kweisi Mfume, who represents the area where Baltimore’s collapsed Francis Scott Key Bridge stood, said he spoke over the weekend with Speaker Mike Johnson and senior House appropriator Tom Cole as he seeks to rally support for federal funding to rebuild the bridge and reopen the Port of Baltimore.

“This is not, nor should it be, a partisan issue,” Mfume (D-Md.) said at a press conference alongside Maryland Democratic Gov. Wes Moore. Mfume added that, in talking to Cole (R-Okla.) — a frontrunner to lead the Appropriations Committee — he got a sense of “how dedicated he is and will be to making sure that this is taken care of.”

On Republicans who expressed skepticism toward congressional funding for rebuilding the bridge, Mfume said: “Petty minds have petty thoughts. The larger base of Americans realize how valuable this port is to the national economy and to supply chains.”

All Maryland officials stressed the reconstruction phase for the bridge would be lengthy, and that they’re still in the opening stages of removing debris following the collapse of the bridge.

The White House said earlier Monday that President Joe Biden would visit the scene of the collapse later this week.

Congressional hearings, once regarded as a critical accountability tool, have morphed into a battleground for attention in the digital age.

With the rise of social media platforms, the reach of these hearings now extend far beyond the confines of Washington. Members of Congress have used this opportunity, leveraging every medium to capture the attention of their constituents back home. Viral moments can mean wider name recognition, and members will often point to those exchanges specifically in fundraising emails, growing their base of support.

Two hearings in particular epitomize this shift: Testimony by leaders of three top universities about antisemitism on college campuses and the summoning of tech CEOs about online child safety.

Watch this video to see how members use questioning to score political points.

It’s April Fools’ Day, that time of year when lawmakers can’t resist the urge to try jokes that are funny — but not too funny — and almost always fail. Here’s a lineup of this year’s attempts that caught our eye:

Winners, for whom the bar is admittedly low:

Sen. Jon Tester (D-Mont.) claimed to have grown back his long-lost fingers. For those unfamiliar with the bit, the senator only has seven fingers due to a farming accident … usually.
Sen. John Fetterman (D-Pa.) revealed the (humorous) truth about his alleged body double.
Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) talked about brisket. A lot. This isn’t technically April Fools’ content but it gave us a chuckle nonetheless.

We won’t be so uncharitable as to name losers, but the… non-winners of the day so far:

Sen. Peter Welch (D-Vt.) asserted Canadian maple syrup is better than Vermont maple syrup. We’d never trust Welch to turn his back on Vermont. 
Rep. Seth Moulton (D-Mass.) did his own mean tweets session — a play on the late-night “Jimmy Kimmel Live” bit where celebrities read mean tweets about themselves on camera. Moulton’s rendition included a laugh track in the background and a lot of talk about trains. 
Not a politician, but the D.C. metro system ran a fake ad for a perfume based on the Capitol South metro stop. We do not know what this would smell like — and we do not want to. 
He’s not a member of Congress, but former President Donald Trump’s campaign sent an email that said he was suspending his 2024 bid, followed by a “JUST KIDDING” and a “HAPPY APRIL FOOLS DAY!” That is the sort of April Fools joke that journalist nightmares are made of.

We can’t forget the anti-April Fools’ genre of congressional rhetoric that pops up once a year:

Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.), who’s filed a motion to vacate against Speaker Mike Johnson, posted on X that if Johnson “gives another $60 billion to the defense of Ukraine’s border… the cruel joke would be on the American people. And it won’t be April Fools.”
Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) echoed the sentiment in a post on X lamenting continued attempts to pass Ukraine aid in the House. “Unfortunately, this is not April [Fools],” he wrote.

Members of Congress are leaving in droves. But some former legislators think the grass is still greener in Washington.

A handful of former members of Congress have launched House bids this cycle. For some, it’s been just a couple of years since they were last elected. And for others, it’s been decades. But regardless of the last time they’ve held federal office, should they win, they’ll be entering a Congress that is very different from their previous terms.

Their campaigns come during some trying times in the House. It’s been one of the least productive sessions of Congress ever. The speaker could be ousted — again. Dozens of members aren’t running for reelection, and some are ending their terms early because of the lower chamber’s dysfunction. Even senior staffers are thinking about giving up on Congress.

“I arrive at this moment with an awareness of the urgency of being in Congress to be able to help my colleagues find the commonalities and be able to reunite our country,” said former Rep. Dennis Kucinich, a Democrat-turned-independent who’s looking to run against Republican Rep. Max Miller in Ohio’s 7th District. “Now, does this sound like an ambitious undertaking? Of course, but one must be aware that governance itself is such and that we have to reimagine our country.”

While Kucinich’s path back as an independent is murky, there is at least one former representative who will assuredly return next year: Democrat Gil Cisneros. He narrowly lost his reelection bid to now-Republican Rep. Young Kim in a battleground district in 2020, and will now be facing off against a repeat Republican candidate in deep-blue CA-31.

Other previous members of Congress are also expected to coast to a win in November — as long as they get past their crowded primaries. Marlin Stutzman — who represented Indiana’s 3rd District from 2010 to 2017, until he unsuccessfully ran for Senate — is taking on seven other Republicans next month to succeed outgoing Republican Rep. Jim Banks. But it’s a deep red seat, so the winner of the primary will likely be victorious come the fall. On the other end of the state, former Republican Rep. John Hostettler faces a similarly busy primary field to fill retiring Republican Rep. Larry Bucshon’s seat in the safe GOP 8th District. Hostettler represented the district for over a decade, from 1995 to 2007.

A similar dynamic is at play in Arizona’s 8th District, a ruby red seat that will be open as Republican Rep. Debbie Lesko leaves to run to be on Maricopa County’s board of supervisors. Former Rep. Trent Franks, who resigned in 2017 after female staffers said he approached them about being a surrogate for him and his wife, is up against six other Republicans in the primary.

The same goes for former Rep. Denny Rehberg, a Montana Republican who represented the state’s then-at-large congressional district from 2001 to 2013. Rehberg, who lost a Senate campaign to Democrat Jon Tester in 2012, is trying to get back to D.C. with a bid in the 2nd District, a safe Republican seat held by outgoing Republican Rep. Matt Rosendale.

“I’m not unused to controversy, or disruption, or anything like that,” Rehberg said in February, before he formally announced his bid, referring to the fast food restaurants he operated during the pandemic. “I just want to be helpful in any way I possibly can.”

Cleo Fields, a Democratic Louisiana state senator who was in Congress from 1993 to 1997, is currently the favorite for his party’s nod in Louisiana’s 6th District, a newly drawn majority-Black seat that favors Democrats. But the field can change — there are still three months until the filing deadline. And in Wisconsin’s 1st District, a seat currently held by Republican Rep. Bryan Steil that Donald Trump would have narrowly won in 2020, former Democratic Rep. Peter Barca is considering a run. Barca won a special election in 1993 and narrowly lost in 1994.

Still, the chaos of the House looms over these candidates. Former Rep. Mark Walker (R-N.C.), who last month ended his bid for the 6th District to take a job on the Trump campaign, said he made his decision to come back to Congress before Republicans like Reps. Mike Gallagher (Wis.) and Cathy McMorris Rodgers (Wash.) — people he considers “great members and friends” — decided to call it quits. He wanted to “augment our message into different places and communities.” But that’s harder and harder these days.

“I’m very concerned with the toxicity and the theater,” Walker said. “I do worry about not only where we are today, but currently where we’re trending in the future.”

A version of this story first appeared in POLITICO’S Weekly Score newsletter. Sign up to get it every Monday.

Longtime U.S. Rep. William D. Delahunt of Massachusetts, a Democratic stalwart who postponed his own retirement from Washington to help pass former President Barack Obama’s legislative agenda, has died following a long-term illness, his family announced.

Delahunt died Saturday at his home in Quincy, Massachusetts, at the age of 82, news reports said.

Delahunt served 14 years in the U.S. House of Representatives, from 1997 to 2011, for Massachusetts’s 10th congressional district. He also was the Norfolk County district attorney from 1975 to 1996 after serving in the Massachusetts House of Represenatives from 1973 to 1975.

The Delahunt family issued a statement Saturday saying he passed away “peacefully,” but did not disclose his specific cause of death, news reports said.

“While we mourn the loss of such a tremendous person, we also celebrate his remarkable life and his legacy of dedication, service, and inspiration,” the statement said. “We could always turn to him for wisdom, solace and a laugh, and his absence leaves a gaping hole in our family and our hearts.”

Democratic U.S. Sen. Ed Markey of Massachusetts lauded Delahunt’s long public service as a legislator in the nation’s capital and a prosecutor in the county south of Boston.

“I met with Bill in Quincy in February, and he was clear and as committed as ever to working on behalf of the South Shore and the people of Massachusetts,” Markey said in a statement.

“It is a fitting honor that the door of the William D. Delahunt Norfolk County Courthouse opens every day so that the people inside can do the hard work of making lives better, as Bill Delahunt did. The Commonwealth and the country are better for Bill Delahunt’s vision and service.”

President Nicolás Maduro of Venezuela posted a statement on X, formerly Twitter, mourning Delahunt’s passing. As a member of Congress, Delahunt brokered a 2005 deal with then-Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez to obtain heating oil for low-income Massachusetts residents, according to news reports. Delahunt also attended Chavez’s state funeral in Caracas in March 2013.

Delahunt stepped down from the U.S. House in January 2011. He told The Boston Globe he had previously considered retirement, but fellow veteran Bay State legislator Sen. Edward M. Kennedy convinced him he was needed to help pass Obama’s legislative initiatives at the time.

Delahunt was an early Obama backer, becoming the first member of the Massachusetts congressional delegation to endorse the Illinois senator’s presidential bid, according to reporting by The Patriot Ledger, the newspaper in Delahunt’s hometown, Quincy.

Announcing his retirement in March 2010, Delahunt said Kennedy’s death the previous year turned his thoughts to finding time for priorities beyond Washington.

“It became clear that I wanted to spend my time, the time that I have left, with my family, with my friends and with my loved ones,” Delahunt said.

There are few bastions of bipartisanship left in Congress, but the Tom Lantos Human Rights Commission was one. That is, until the fight over Brazil.

More than a year after supporters of right-wing former Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro ransacked government buildings to express their fury over his election loss, the commission’s two co-chairs are fighting over an attempt to give the Bolsonaro crowd a hearing to air their grievances.

It’s a dispute partly about Brazil, and partly about Bolsanaro’s like-minded friend, former President Donald Trump.

The Republican co-chair, Rep. Chris Smith of New Jersey, proposed holding the hearing earlier this month, billing it as exploring “democracy, freedom and the rule of law in Brazil,” according to a draft announcement I obtained. Smith insists that he is trying to help Brazilians unjustly persecuted — or prosecuted, if you prefer — by a government whose tactics in the wake of the riots have, in fairness, drawn widespread concerns.

But the Democratic co-chair, Rep. Jim McGovern of Massachusetts, saw something more sinister at play and refused to permit the hearing. He and his team point to the parallels between the Jan. 8, 2023, Brazilian insurrection and the one led by Trump supporters in Washington on Jan. 6, 2021.

“This is happening because the GOP no longer believes in democracy and wants to normalize far-right political violence,” McGovern said in a statement to me, noting that “those who attacked the Brazilian Congress were inspired by Trump’s insurrection.”

His team also was upset that social media posts about the hearing appeared online before McGovern had made a decision on it, suggesting that the GOP side had leaked information about the event in violation of commission procedures. Their frustration grew into fury when Smith later held a press conference with some of the people who could have testified, and who had insulted McGovern online for blocking the hearing.

The debate is unusual because it involves the Lantos commission, a panel that focuses on human rights and has long been an oasis of bipartisanship in the growing dystopia that is Congress. The commission was established in 2008 and is named after the only Holocaust survivor to serve in Congress. It doesn’t vet legislation the way a panel such as the Senate Foreign Relations Committee does. But it does offer lawmakers expertise in crafting bills and serves as a resource to everyone from journalists like myself to Capitol Hill staffers trying to understand rights-related crises abroad.

Two McGovern aides told me that they now worry the dispute over the Brazil hearing is a sign of future problems for the commission. “This politicization undermines the commission’s mandate,” one of the McGovern aides said. Both aides were granted anonymity to candidly discuss sensitive behind-the-scenes issues.

The worries come as a similar bipartisan institution, the Helsinki Commission — an independent government body that includes lawmakers — is experiencing its own internal rifts while facing hostility from some in the MAGA wing of the GOP.

Such disputes bode poorly for U.S. national security. Congress already is increasingly unable to make important foreign policy decisions — from confirming ambassadors to sending military aid to Ukraine — because of political polarization. When even panels such as Lantos, which, relatively speaking, has little actual power, face partisan flare-ups, it’s another sign of the deep impairment.

Tom Malinowski, a former Democratic lawmaker from New Jersey who also served as a top human rights official in the Obama administration, told me that the potential fallout from the Lantos fight affects America’s global reputation, which is increasingly suffering due to partisan swings.

Lantos commission hearings are “valuable for people around the world to see Democrats and Republicans genuinely agreeing that repression and dictatorship is bad, whether the dictators were on one end of the spectrum or the opposite,” he said.

One way in which the Lantos commission has long tried to minimize political disputes is by having the Republican and Democratic co-chairs sign off on hearings proposed by the other. Each can edit hearing notices and add witnesses to proposed panels. And until both sides agree on such elements, no information is to be shared publicly.

In its proposal, Smith’s side of the commission said the hearing would explore “serious human rights violations committed by Brazilian officials on a large scale, including judicial malfeasance; the political abuse of legal procedures to persecute political opposition; violations of freedom of speech; and muzzling opposition media,” according to the draft announcement.

Concerns about Brazil’s legal process have hit new highs among conservatives in and outside the country amid the government’s efforts to prosecute supporters of Bolsonaro and the ex-president himself. Bolsonaro’s supporters involved in the 2023 insurrection have many of the same grievances as Trump supporters did in 2021, alleging, for instance, they’re being unfairly prosecuted for trying to save democracy after a stolen election.

But it’s not just conservatives who are worried about Brazil. Brazilian authorities’ often heavy-handed response to the attacks in Brasilia and other activities of the far-right has raised broader concerns about whether, in attempting to protect democracy, they’ve become oppressive.

McGovern’s aides said they initially told Republicans that the description of the hearing and the proposed witnesses showed that the goal was to allow Bolsonaro allies to vent anger against Brazil’s government. That, they said, was a misuse of the commission. The GOP and Democratic sides also sparred over whether one of the potential witnesses faced criminal investigations, which Democrats said raised questions about his motivations for testifying.

As the McGovern aides learned more about the situation, they grew to believe it was also a way for Republicans to give cover to Trump insurrectionists — whom Trump has suggested he would pardon if reelected.

In his statement, McGovern — who has co-chaired the commission since its beginning — said it was “disgraceful” that Republicans were trying to “legitimize and amplify far-right election deniers.”

McGovern also was upset to be blasted with social media attacks after he blocked the hearing. Among those lacing into him was Bolsonaro’s son, Eduardo, and at least one proposed witness.

“It now appears that Republicans are coordinating directly with the leaders of that attempted coup to intimidate me,” he said in his statement.

Smith insisted in a statement to me that he’s long had concerns about human rights in Brazil, especially when the country has been under the leadership of prominent leftist Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, known as Lula. He is the current president but also held the role between 2003-2010.

“It’s unfortunate that Co-Chair Jim McGovern is uncomfortable discussing the human rights situation in Brazil, especially under Lula’s reign of terror,” said Smith, who took over as GOP co-chair in 2019. “I have had grave concerns about human rights in Lula’s Brazil dating back to the mid-2000s, when I traveled to Brazil to successfully fight for the return of a New Jersey child who had been abducted and held there for five years.” He nonetheless noted that the commission continues to function, with other hearings scheduled.

Smith made sure his side still got its say with the March 12 press conference at the Capitol.

Surrounded by a few dozen people and under the glare of the sun, Bolsonaro supporters — including Eduardo — warned that Brazilian democracy was under threat from the current government of Lula. In particular, they said the Brazilian courts have too much power.

McGovern and his team were incensed that the news conference included people who had attacked McGovern personally. While the figures did not directly go after the Democratic lawmaker during the news conference, McGovern felt Smith should not have given them a platform.

Malinowski is among those hoping the Lantos infighting over Brazil doesn’t turn into a permanent fracture, because it would rob vulnerable people of an important platform.

“It’s a place that’s allowed dissidents and human rights activists from around the world to have a voice on a big American stage,” he said.

Two days after Baltimore’s Francis Scott Key Bridge collapse, signs of friction — or outright reluctance — are emerging among some lawmakers about using new federal dollars to rebuild it, even as President Joe Biden implores Congress to fully fund the recovery.

“It was kind of outrageous immediately for Biden to express in this tragedy the idea that he’s going to use federal funds to pay for the entirety,” Rep. Dan Meuser (R-Pa.) told Fox Business on Thursday. “This is a crisis situation, but it needs a plan, not a knee-jerk spend reaction.”

The Pennsylvania Republican suggested that instead of spending new money for reconstruction of the bridge, lawmakers pull cash from the “ridiculous” electric vehicle deployment program that Congress voted to create earlier in Biden’s administration.

Several other lawmakers from both parties appeared hesitant Thursday about Congress approving rebuilding money until insurance and shipping companies pay the costs they’re responsible for stemming from the tragic collision of a freighter with the bridge. Six workers are presumed dead in connection with the accident; the total bill for rebuilding is likely to be billions of dollars.

Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), for one, said he would support federal funding to rebuild the bridge — with the “caveat” that the company behind the freighter needs to pay out any required damages.

“We shouldn’t be spending taxpayers’ money if the insurance company has a responsibility,” Grassley said.

That’s also the message from Rep. John Garamendi (D-Calif.), a senior member of the House’s transportation committee and the former insurance commissioner of California.

“I don’t think it has to be federal taxpayer money,” he told Bloomberg TV in an interview. “Let’s first go to the insurance side of it and then we’ll see what’s left over.”

Garamendi added that environmental concerns ought to be “secondary — or maybe not even considered” as Maryland seeks to rebuild the bridge as quickly as possible.

Biden said in the aftermath of the disaster that he intended for the federal government “pay for the entire cost of reconstructing that bridge, and I expect the Congress to support my effort.” However, congressional leaders have been quiet so far on their plans concerning the rebuild, as they await firm cost estimates of the money that must be appropriated for it.

Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) told reporters Thursday that a cost estimate for rebuilding the bridge and reopening the Port of Baltimore was underway.

Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg confirmed Wednesday during a White House press conference that the Biden administration could tap into some emergency funds in the short term but called it “likely” that lawmakers would be asked “to help top up those funds” as the project advances.

Congress has acted swiftly to provide emergency funds after previous major bridge collapses, though many supporters of aid for Baltimore concede that the Hill’s current dysfunction will make that task far more difficult than it was in 2007 — when lawmakers took mere days to approve money for the rebuilding of a Minnesota bridge.

“This is a very different Congress right now. It’s very partisan,” Rep. Seth Moulton (D-Mass.) said on CNN on Thursday. “I’m cautiously optimistic that we’ll be able to do something.”

Meredith Lee Hill contributed to this report.