Two days after she lost her bid to become Houston’s next mayor, Democratic Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee has filed for reelection to her seat in Congress.

Jackson Lee, 73, filed paperwork for reelection on Monday. She enters the race for the safe blue House seat she has held for nearly three decades after state Sen. John Whitmire defeated her in a landslide loss to become the mayor of Houston on Saturday, 64%-36%. Her campaign did not respond to a request for comment on the filing.

But her entry into the race won’t be the glide path it’s been in previous elections. The race for her seat was already well underway.

Until Jackson Lee entered the race, Amanda Edwards, a former Houston city councilmember and previous U.S. Senate candidate running on a promise to bring generational change to the district, was the frontrunner for the nomination.

Since announcing her campaign in June, Edwards, 41, has already shown a strong fundraising effort, having pulled in just over $1 million to her campaign coffers — more than Jackson Lee has raised in each of her election cycles except one. She ended the last FEC fundraising quarter with more than $800,000 cash on hand. Edwards will continue her campaign regardless of Jackson Lee filing, she told POLITICO.

“We announced back in June of 2023 my candidacy for Congress and immediately there was widespread excitement and support: grassroots, institutional and fundraising,” Edwards told POLITICO. “People are ready for change.”

That money haul could prove troublesome for Jackson Lee, who had just north of $200,000 cash on hand in her federal campaign coffers in the latest fundraising quarter. And while she recently reported having around the same amount on hand for her mayoral run, federal laws prevent her from porting that money directly into her congressional campaign.

Isaiah Martin, 25, announced he was running for the seat in an online video in September, but the status of his campaign was unclear after the congresswoman’s announcement. Martin had reported almost $300,000 cash on hand in his latest federal campaign finance filing. He faced criticism during his campaign from those on the left for saying that he would support a broad pro-Israel resolution.

Edwards and Martin were strong supporters of Jackson Lee’s mayoral run, and both former interns in her congressional office.

Jackson Lee has represented the district since 1995 and become known for her persistence — both in her dogged legislative efforts and drive to end up on camera — and she has funneled millions of dollars back home and helped spearhead notable lawmaking drives, including the 2022 reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act. Having faced no primary opponent in most of her reelection campaigns, she has never met a serious challenge for her deep-blue seat.

Texas’ 18th Congressional District — the former seat of numerous Texas political legends, including famed civil rights activist Barbara Jordan — covers the heart of Houston. It includes the city’s downtown as well as the historic Third Ward, a historically prominent Black neighborhood.

House Republicans are inches away from a major step toward impeaching President Joe Biden, as members from swing districts drop their reservations about plowing forward with the GOP investigation.

A whip count compiled by POLITICO shows that a single Republican, Rep. Ken Buck (R-Colo.), opposes a vote scheduled for this week to formalize the impeachment inquiry. Other members thought to be on the fence are now either supportive or likely to support it, according to the tally, including a majority of Republicans who represent districts Biden carried in 2020.

Still, GOP leaders have only a three-vote margin for error, and some of their swing-district members are still uneasy about supporting the formal inquiry, with about a half-dozen telling POLITICO they’re undecided or unwilling to say where they stand.

A vote to officially sanction the impeachment inquiry would inject a burst of momentum into the effort that would be difficult for Republicans to later pull back from. But some moderate Republicans argue that a lack of cooperation from Hunter Biden and other family members has forced the GOP’s hand. Formalizing the investigation would boost the GOP’s leverage in its pursuit of documents and witnesses, they say, and represents just one step in the process.

The investigation has yet to find any direct evidence that Biden exerted improper influence to help his family members’ businesses.

“This is an inquiry. It’s not the actual impeachment. So we should let it go forward and continue to ask questions and subpoena witnesses,” said Rep. Doug LaMalfa (R-Calif.).

The whip count is a sign of unity for a House GOP majority that can’t seem to agree on much of anything else. Republican leadership and investigative committee chairs are increasingly confident that they’ll get the near unity required to bless their Biden inquiry before the holidays.

Nevertheless, the roughly half-dozen undecided Republicans will need to mostly break Speaker Mike Johnson’s way to avoid an embarrassing face-plant on the vote. Back in September, then-Speaker Kevin McCarthy vowed to hold a vote on the GOP’s impeachment inquiry only to backtrack because of opposition from centrists and Biden-district members.

“I didn’t come to Washington to expel a member of Congress or impeach a president,” said Rep. Marc Molinaro (R-N.Y.), one of the remaining undecided votes. Molinaro said he still wanted to read the inquiry resolution before making a decision.

But he issued a warning to the White House that indicated he’s prepared to join most of the rest of the GOP on the inquiry: “The administration would do well by honoring the subpoenas of the committees and participating in the investigation. If what is necessary to ensure oversight is this next step, then I’m certainly open to it.”

Republican leaders and investigative panel leaders like Jordan have worked to try to tamp down concerns within their conference about formalizing the inquiry, both in closed-door meetings and one-on-one floor conversations. They’re working to persuade the remaining undecided members by underscoring that approval of a Biden inquiry isn’t the final word.

“We’re going to get the votes,” Judiciary Chair Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) predicted ahead of the vote.

Biden-district Rep. Juan Ciscomani (R-Ariz.) pointed back to his “very compelling” conversations with colleagues as helpful to solidifying his support for the inquiry.

“I had a very compelling presentation from our conference. I’m all about transparency and getting to the bottom of all the information. That’s what the inquiry will be about,” he said.

GOP leaders are hoping to limit their internal opposition to Buck, a frequent party gadfly who declared in a recent Washington Post op-ed that “Republicans in the House who are itching for an impeachment are relying on an imagined history.”

Buck told POLITICO last week he hasn’t “seen any new evidence” since that might change his mind.

Republicans are hoping to make a decision as soon as mid-January about whether or not to escalate their inquiry into articles of impeachment against Joe Biden. While they’ve uncovered evidence of Hunter Biden using the family name to burnish his own influence, and poked holes in past statements by the president, they’ve yet to find a direct link to actions Joe Biden took — as president or vice president — that were aimed at aiding his family’s business deals.

And top House Republicans still have some work to do before they can greenlight their inquiry.

Biden-district Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick (R-Pa.) said that he needed to talk with Oversight Chair James Comer (R-Ky.) and Jordan before he decided how he would vote.

“They have a case they have to make,” he said.

Jordan and Comer are also currently locked in a standoff over Hunter Biden, a must-have witness for many on the party’s right flank.

Republicans have subpoenaed Hunter Biden to appear for a closed-door deposition on Wednesday. But attorneys for the president’s son countered with an offer for public testimony, and the two sides have been at a stalemate since then.

Comer and Jordan, who have offered to release the transcript of any closed-door deposition with Hunter Biden, have suggested they might start contempt proceedings against him unless he appears as subpoenaed.

The White House, in a recent memo, noted that — between the administration, banks and private individuals — Republicans have received tens of thousands of pages of financial records and conducted dozens of hours of interviews. The National Archives also recently said it will hand over more than 60,000 additional records.

But the standoff has helped fuel a shift in momentum among House Republicans, even those in potentially vulnerable districts.

“The president is saying he isn’t going to provide information until we get an inquiry, so I went from a no to a yes,” Rep. Don Bacon (R-Neb.), one of the House’s most outspoken GOP centrists, said in an interview. “My view of it is, let’s just get the information so the voters have it [in November].”

Nicholas Wu contributed to this report.

President Joe Biden will host President Volodymyr Zelenskyy of Ukraine at the White House on Tuesday, as negotiations on an aid deal for the country remain stalled in Congress.

Zelenskyy’s visit will “underscore the United States’ unshakeable commitment to supporting the people of Ukraine as they defend themselves against Russia’s brutal invasion,” White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said in a statement on X, formerly Twitter.

The meeting is the latest White House effort to apply pressure on Congress, where a deal that would deliver emergency aid to Ukraine seems to have reached an impasse.

In a letter to congressional leaders last week, White House budget chief Shalanda Young warned that inaction before the end of the year on a new round of funding threatens to “kneecap Ukraine on the battlefield.”

After announcing this week that he would resign from Congress before the end of the year, former House Speaker Kevin McCarthy endorsed Donald Trump for president.

“I believe Donald Trump will win, I believe that Republicans will gain more seats in the House, and that Republicans will win the Senate,” McCarthy told CBS News’ Robert Costa in a prerecorded preview of an upcoming interview.

“I will support President Trump,” he said when asked whether his warm words were an endorsement of the former president.

McCarthy, who clinched the speakership after 15 votes in January, was ousted from his position in October after hard-right conservatives lodged an effort to displace him. They publicly said that his work with Democrats to keep the government open defied a deal over how Republicans would approach negotiating the budget. And Trump, who still looms large over a prominent group of populist conservatives in the House, did little to stave off the effort in McCarthy’s hour of need.

And McCarthy didn’t even ask for his help.

The pair have had a tumultuous relationship for years, from McCarthy expressing that Trump bore responsibility for the Jan. 6 riot at the U.S. Capitol to him appearing at the former president’s side weeks later in a renewed endorsement. And now, McCarthy appears ready to ride by Trump’s side as 2024 arrives, while other Republicans on the Hill brace for another Trump presidency. Other contenders in the GOP primary race have failed to gain meaningful traction in a race that Trump has dominated.

In another sign of warmth towards the former president, the California Republican also said that he would serve in a Trump cabinet — if he gets a good spot.

“In the right position, if I am the best person for the job, yes,” McCarthy said. “I worked with President Trump on a lot of policy. We worked together to win the majority.”

The Trump campaign, which did not immediately respond to a request for comment, released a forcefully worded statement on Friday that allies should not speculate about potential administration appointments. That message was released in apparent response to media reports that Trump was poised to pick an array of far-right voices to prominent positions in a second administration.

“People publicly discussing potential administration jobs for themselves or their friends are, in fact, hurting President Trump … and themselves,” the campaign said in a statement on Friday. “These are an unwelcomed distraction.”

House Financial Services Chair Patrick McHenry isn’t planning to coast through his final year in office.

The North Carolina Republican in an interview Friday outlined a series of major legislative and oversight targets that he’ll be driving over the next several months, as he faces a critical window to cement his legacy. McHenry plans to step down at the end of his term after two decades in office.

First things first

McHenry said his top priority is to pass and enact legislation on cryptocurrency, data privacy and capital formation.

He said he’s working with House leadership to find floor time for landmark crypto bills that would revamp the digital asset powers of the SEC and CFTC and also set up a new legal pathway for stablecoins.

McHenry said his biggest challenge on the crypto bills is “politics.” He said Senate Banking Chair Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) and Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), who have pushed back on his proposals, are leaving consumers worse off.

“It’s just a question of getting enough floor time and focus from policymakers to see why we need market structure, why we need a definition, why we need regulators that are fully empowered and why that’s good for capital formation, why that’s good for consumer protection,” he said. “What we need is broader engagement. And on some of these policies, like with China and with digital assets, a significant challenge is education.”

McHenry said recent Treasury Department recommendations to bolster crypto anti-money laundering rules are “problematic.”

“But they’re showing that there is a need for congressional action to bring clarity here,” he said. “I welcome that, and I welcome the conversation on the proper approach and a balanced approach.”

In addition, McHenry is working with Foreign Affairs Chair Michael McCaul (R-Texas) and Select Committee on the CCP Chair Mike Gallagher (R-Wis.) to hash out a compromise on how to police capital flows to China by the end of the first quarter.

McCaul and his allies are backing legislation that would restrict U.S. investment in certain sectors of China’s economy, including AI and quantum computing. McHenry wants to use company-specific sanctions instead.

He said he opposes McCaul’s bill.

“It’s a deeply flawed approach that limits American business and doesn’t actually have a strong effect against China,” he said.

Republicans on the other side, who are fighting for restrictions on outbound investment into China, say McHenry is outnumbered. But he’s not backing down.

“They thought they could roll me and say nasty things about me in the press and I would cave,” he said. “They can say nasty things if they wish, but that doesn’t make their policy good or effective.”

What’s next for Financial Services

McHenry is planning to tee up a series of additional oversight and legislative targets in the first quarter. January’s focus will be on “rogue regulators,” followed by work in February on “holding bad actors accountable” and a March emphasis on American competitiveness.

— “We’re going to start with a focus on rogue regulators from this administration: the capital rule, the Basel Endgame, the climate rulemaking and the regulatory agenda of the Securities and Exchange Commission.”

— “Then we’ll have a keen focus on AML-BSA policies and China’s abuse of the international finance system. So a lot of focus on OFAC and FinCEN and how we enforce sanctions, how we carry out economic statecraft and how we protect against money laundering at home.”

— “Then we want to pivot into how we enhance our competitiveness. That too entails the Basel Endgame, the rulemaking of the administration and also what we seek to do to make the economy better” via policy.

The “opening act” will have a heavy emphasis on oversight but legislation is also planned, including on sanctions and anti-money laundering rules.

Why now?

When asked why he’s retiring, McHenry said it’s been a “key year in my service in Congress” and a “helluva ride,” after being a central player in electing a speaker and then temporarily serving in the post himself. He also cited GOP committee term limits, which mean he wouldn’t be able to keep serving as the Financial Services committee’s top Republican after 2024 without seeking a waiver.

“Republican term limits are impactful and matter, and they’re good for the institution and for the Republican conference,” he said. “It’s a net win. In my circumstance, I knew that was the deal going in.”

“I’m not down on the institution in any way,” he added.

What he’ll do after leaving office

“I’m open to what comes next and interested in seeing what’s out there,” he said. “But I knew I had to make the decision and close this chapter before determining the next. Truly.”

Senate Republicans on Thursday made their latest offer on border policy changes, including a list of demands Democrats have so far shunned.

Republicans are seeking a ban on class-based “parole,” a key tool the White House has used to create legal entry pathways and manage the influx at the border, according to two people familiar with the details of the list of demands. Their latest offer would ban the administration’s ability to extend parole for migrants — a policy change that would also apply to Afghans and Ukrainians who have been authorized to live in the U.S. for humanitarian reasons.

The GOP offer also proposes the creation of a new expulsion authority, reviving a form of the policy known as Title 42, and would also set metrics for automating a border shutdown — halting U.S. acceptance of migrants if border numbers hit a certain level.

Republicans are also looking to restrict the administration’s parole authority to release migrants from detention, and would require mandatory electronic monitoring for anyone, including children, who are not detained. They are also trying to implement a so-called transit ban and establish nationwide, expedited removal authority — a return to a Trump-era policy that the Biden administration rescinded in 2021.

While the GOP’s counteroffer helped jump-start talks after a failed Senate vote this week, the inclusion of policies already rejected by Democrats raises questions about whether a bipartisan proposal could come together before Congress breaks for the year. At a minimum, it showcases how much daylight remains in cutting a border deal that can unlock billions in funding for Ukraine and Israel.

An aide to Sen. James Lankford of Oklahoma, the top Republican negotiator, said there is “no final draft.”

“Lankford has been clear that they have been exchanging paper for weeks,” the aide said.

Lankford and Sens. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and Kyrsten Sinema (I-Ariz.) met Thursday before breaking for the weekend, agreeing to resume negotiations that have proved incredibly difficult to finalize. Even if they were to agree on policy changes in the abstract, they would still have to formalize those into actual legislative language. And it remains unclear whether anything the Senate passes could find the necessary support in the House.

Pressure is not just coming from Republicans either. Most of the items proposed by the GOP are opposed by progressives and immigration advocates, and Murphy has complained that Republicans are pushing a total shutdown of the border in previous offers.

“We’re still swapping paper like we have been,” said Lankford on Thursday afternoon, after meeting with Murphy. “It’s not just parole, it’s how do you handle thousands of people being released every day?”

Spokespeople for the other negotiating senators did not comment.