Interview transcript:

Terry Gerton There’s a lot to talk about, but it strikes me as strange that here we are two weeks before all of the continuing resolutions expire. The Senate is out this week. The House is planning to be out next week. Are they going to finish in time?

Loren Duggan There’s a path for them to do so and unlike other deadlines, when they’re approaching, everyone’s hair on fire — we haven’t felt that dynamic on this one. The House and Senate appropriators, they’re reaching deals, releasing packages, processing them through the House in the Senate, and there’s a way to get this all done by Jan. 30, or if they need a week or something, appropriators are already saying we could do another short-term. But there’s not a panic about this deadline that’s only two weeks away or so.

Terry Gerton Well, let’s recap, which bills are through and who would you say are the big winners in those bills?

Loren Duggan So we had the three bills go through last year. We’ve had another three-bill package get through both chambers this year. The House sent another two-bill package over to the Senate, who can deal with that when they come back. And then there’s this four-bill package, the remaining outstanding ones that they still need to tackle and get through both chambers. So there’s a lot of progress there. The last one’s big — Defense, Labor, HHS — and thorny in the case of the Homeland Security Department, given everything that’s going on there with ICE in Minnesota and concerns about lawmaker oversight there.

Terry Gerton Well, Homeland and Defense both got big chunks of money in the summer that they’re continuing to operate. So does it feel like maybe there’s a little less urgency around those bills?

Loren Duggan A little less urgency on the Defense side, where I think if you put that together with the reconciliation bill, it’s like $1 trillion. Of course, the president wants to take that to $1.5 trillion next year. We can deal with that another time. And Homeland, that extra pool of money has helped. They’ve used that to hire staff, to open centers. But there was a little controversy because DHS said if an ICE facility is funded with the reconciliation dollars, some of the oversight is different there than if it was regular appropriations. So we’ve seen a distinction made there. But definitely having that money earlier, locking that in for the administration, was really key to their plans for the year.

Terry Gerton What are the big controversies that are still on the table that are going to have to be hashed out before that last bill package gets through?

Loren Duggan DHS has been the sticking point. That was initially supposed to be in the last package; it ended up only being two bills instead of three as they worked through some of these discussions. And you could see a deal being made there and getting that through, maybe both chambers. But there could be a fight on that one in either chamber, depending on what you need. What we have seen are very bipartisan packages where the votes have been widespread, some opposition obviously, but they’ve gotten through very comfortably after all the fights that we went through ahead of this point in time.

Terry Gerton It does also seem, at least on the bills that have gotten through so far, that Congress has largely rejected the cuts that the administration proposed for 50% reductions are higher. Most of the reductions are very minor. So since agencies have already been downsized in many cases, what does this mean? How will relative increases, I guess, compared to where they’re operating today — how will that come into effect?

Loren Duggan In some cases, it’s less than they had last year, but still more than the administration wanted and more than House Republicans wanted in their initial versions. So we’re seeing a classic compromise being hashed out here between the House and the Senate, enough money for Democrats to support these bills, not the drastic cuts. And they’ve hastened to say “no poison pills” when they’ve released these different packages. But we’ll see how the agencies respond to more money. That’s been a fight over the course of the administration, where they’ve wanted to impound funds, rescind them, but if you put them back out there the agencies can use them. And even something like foreign aid is going to the State Department now, rather than USAID, after USAID was disestablished by the administration.

Terry Gerton I’m speaking with Loren Duggan. He’s deputy news director for Bloomberg Government. Loren, outside of the appropriations, what other sorts of legislative discussions are taking place on the Hill these days? ACA subsidies still on top?

Loren Duggan ACA subsidies has been a big driver of discussion. We are now at the end of open enrollment without an answer to what to do with these credits, if they’ll be extended. I assume the senators are still talking this week and when they come back. Donald Trump’s proposal last week didn’t necessarily change the dynamic too much. But one thing that might: We’re going to see insurance company executives brought to the Hill before two different House committees this week. They’ll have to answer some tough questions. Probably get a little beaten up by both sides in this case, because both parties have some concerns with them. So we’ll see how that plays out. The ACA, that’s now a deadline that’s passed; they’re still trying to figure out how to resolve that debate.

Terry Gerton There was also a lot of news last week about the crypto bill in the Senate. Tell us what’s going on there.

Loren Duggan There were markups that had been scheduled in two committees, and then they got pulled back as they continue to work through the issues and deal with the industry feedback. I think it was the Coinbase CEO who was up there weighing in pretty directly with lawmakers. So they pulled back, didn’t move forward, and they’re going to recalibrate the bill. This is the market structure bill, not to be confused with the stablecoin legislation, which is part of the crypto universe. This is a broader market structure bill, who has regulatory authority. I assume they’ll rejoin that debate when they return next week, if they’re not working up while they’re gone. But there’s big interest, big money, big stakes in this legislation.

Terry Gerton All of the things we’ve talked about so far are sort of normal order: appropriations bills, although late, getting through other sorts of legislative activities. Let’s talk about Greenland for a minute, because it seems like it has the potential to really upend all kinds of conversations and agreements that are going on. President Trump made tariff threats over the weekend. We have a congressional delegation on the ground in Denmark. What does this all mean when it comes back to domestic politics?

Loren Duggan We’ll have to see, there hasn’t been a ground swell against this. There are some members of Congress who concede it might be a good idea if Greenland was part of the United States, given its geostrategic importance. But then there’s other members of Congress who have said, maybe we’ll have to impeach Trump if he goes too far on this, so there’s not a consensus. There’s definitely a lot of range of opinions on this one. And it’s something that Donald Trump’s going to hear directly from other world leaders when he goes to Davos, Switzerland, this week and he’ll be side-by-side with some of the people who he’s threatened to tariff or have strong opinions on this, given their proximity to Denmark.

Terry Gerton We usually focus here on domestic politics, but this seems like it will flow over into lots of conversations. What are you expecting to hear out of Davos as that conversation gets started?

Loren Duggan Well, we had expected a domestic announcement with the president talking about his home ownership plan, maybe taking money from 401(k)s to make a down payment, part of his broader affordability discussion, home ownership discussion. So that’s a domestic thing, but we’re definitely going to hear the global things. Not just Greenland, but his “Board of Peace” that he’s talked about, where he wants world leaders to chip in money and be part of this arrangement. I’m sure those discussions will continue and there’ll be lots of feedback, given the compact nature of Davos and everyone who will be there. There’s a little bit of domestic, but it’s more of a foreign play given who’s there. It is the World Economic Forum after all, and the world will be there and talking to Donald Trump directly.

Terry Gerton When everybody gets back, what will you be watching for on the Hill?

Loren Duggan We’ll see if they can wrap up the spending debate and then they’ll be turning to February and eventually the fiscal ’27 process is right there. We’ll just get done with this one and really have to turn the page pretty quickly.

The post Crypto overhaul, Greenland, ACA subsidies, spending bills: Lawmakers’ January juggling acts first appeared on Federal News Network.

Republicans on the Senate Appropriations Committee have put forward a 2026 homeland security spending bill that would staunch some workforce cuts at the Department of Homeland Security.

The committee released a draft version of the fiscal 2026 homeland security appropriations measure on Friday. Lawmakers will return to Capitol Hill after the holidays with a deadline to pass annual spending bills for most federal agencies by Jan. 30, when the current continuing resolution expires.

Lead appropriators in the House and Senate reached an agreement on funding allocations for the remainder of fiscal 2026 over the weekend. While they did not release specific numbers, House Appropriations Committee Chairman Tom Cole (R-Okla.) said the allocations would fall below projected spending levels under the CR.

“This pathway forward aligns with President Trump’s clear direction to rein in runaway, beltway-driven spending,” Cole said in a statement. “We will now begin expeditiously drafting the remaining nine full-year bills to ensure we are ready to complete our work in January.”

What’s the topline Senate DHS funding package?

Senate appropriators’ draft homeland security spending bill includes $92.3 billion for DHS in fiscal 2026, including nearly $66 billion in discretionary spending and $26.3 billion for the Disaster Relief Fund.

Those totals roughly align with what House Appropriations included in their homeland security spending package over the summer. It also comes after DHS received $165 billion in additional funding through fiscal 2029 under the One Big Beautiful Bill Act passed in July.

However, Senate Appropriations Committee Vice Chairwoman Patty Murray (D-Wash.) slammed the Senate committee’s draft proposal, calling it a “partisan bill” and saying Republicans didn’t work with Democrats to finalize a negotiated bill.

“We need more accountability from President Trump’s out-of-control Department of Homeland Security, and as we proceed to conference negotiations on this bill and the remainder of our bills, I am going to keep working to produce the strongest possible legislation,” Murray said. “American families should be able to count on their own government to support them through serious natural disasters and to enforce our immigration laws humanely and in accordance with the law.”

FEMA staffing concerns

The report on the draft homeland security spending bill, however, shows committee Republicans have some concerns about workforce cuts at the Federal Emergency Management Agency.

Roughly 2,500 FEMA staff have left the agency since the spring. The Trump administration has also expressed a desire to move more of FEMA’s responsibilities to state and local governments.

“The committee is concerned that staffing levels are insufficient to effectively and efficiently execute FEMA’s statutory missions,” the report on the draft bill states.

The bill would provide an additional $40 million for FEMA to hire staff to critical positions in its regional operations, and response and recovery divisions, respectively.

The report on the draft bill also stipulates that FEMA “shall maintain a workforce consistent with the personnel and full-time equivalents funded by the pay and non-pay amounts provided in this act.”

“FEMA shall not reduce staffing in such a way that it lacks sufficient staff to issue guidance, provide payments, and provide technical assistance and operational support to grantees in a timely manner; review and approve plans for obligating and expending Federal funds; review expenditures and reports for waste, fraud, and abuse; and perform all other necessary duties to allow recipients to proceed without unnecessary interruption,” the report continues.

CISA cut softened

Like their House counterparts, Senate appropriators are also looking to shore up funding at the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, rejecting steeper CISA cuts proposed by the Trump administration.

The draft Senate bill includes roughly $2.8 billion for CISA in fiscal 2026, just below 2025 funding levels for the cyber agency.

The bill would also reject proposed cuts at CISA’s National Risk Management Center. It would provide $126 million for the NRMC to maintain fiscal 2024 service and staffing levels.

Lawmakers direct CISA to provide a briefing “on the NRMC’s strategic engagement with election stakeholders, including engagement progress to date, future engagement plans and priorities, and information regarding any identified election security risks and shortfalls that should be mitigated in the near-, mid-, and long-terms.”

CISA has lost one-third of its workforce, roughly 1,000 staff, since the spring through a combination of voluntary departures, early retirements and terminations.

The Trump administration’s budget request would reduce CISA’s annual budget by nearly $500 million. It also proposed staff cuts at some CISA divisions, including the NRMC.

Like with FEMA, Senate appropriators also include language in their bill that CISA “shall maintain a workforce consistent with the personnel and full-time equivalents funded by the pay and non-pay amounts provided in this act.”

“CISA shall not reduce staffing in such a way that it lacks sufficient staff to effectively carry out its statutory missions,” the bill states, pointing to the agency’s efforts to secure federal civilian executive branch agencies, work with state and local governments, other sector risk management agencies, international partners and other stakeholders.

It further stipulates that CISA should maintain “no fewer” than 10 regional field offices across the country and directs CISA to employ at least one cybersecurity advisor per state.

The post Senate lawmakers look to stem staff cuts at CISA, FEMA first appeared on Federal News Network.