TanksToTweets

The Hitchhiker’s Guide To What To Expect On DHS Funding When The Senate Meets Monday The DHS funding drama heads back to the Senate Monday morning after the House approved a two-month stopgap spending plan for all of DHS late Friday night. The Senate meets Monday at 10:30 am et in what was supposed to be a brief “pro forma” session where the body simply gavels in and gavels out with a skeleton crew on hand. But that might not be what happens Monday. As soon as the Senate gets through the prayer a pledge, it’s likely a Republican senator seeks recognition from the chair. If that happens, we anticipate the GOP senator to ask unanimous consent (meaning all 100 senators would agree) to take up the DHS bill passed by the House Friday, that it be “read a third time” and passed. The chair will then ask if there is an objection. If any senator - be they a Democrat or Republican - objects, the House bill is dead. That means that the House and Senate continue to be out of alignment on the DHS funding question. For instance, the House didn’t even consider the bill cleared by all 100 senators and passed by the Senate at 2:19 am Friday. The House simply wrote their own two-month interim bill, passed it Friday night and skipped town. If there is no objection, the House and Senate are aligned and will have passed the same bill. That means they are on the same page. Approval of the House bill by the Senate would end the DHS shutdown. But if there’s an objection, everything remains frozen. This is both the parliamentary magic - and dark underbelly of “unanimous consent” in the Senate. You could have 99 senators in favor of something. But all it takes is a solitary objection to foil a bill under “unanimous consent” or “UC” as it’s often called in the Senate. In fact, it’s possible that Democrats could then offer their own DHS funding bill and ask the Senate to approve that by unanimous consent. It’s likely that whatever Republican senator is on duty tomorrow would object, thus blocking the Democratic request. If the Senate blocks the House bill, it’s doubtful there’s any way to end the DHS shutdown until after both bodies return in mid-April after the Easter/Passover recess. Republicans truly want to fund DHS. But a Democratic objection presents the GOP with a political opportunity. They can then point to that objection as the reason DHS remains shuttered, arguing that Democrats blocked the House approved bill. Republicans believe this helps them in the midterms. They ran on border security and won in 2024. Republicans want to point to a Democratic objection as evidence that they don’t want to fund ICE. But by the same token, Democrats could argue that Republicans are partly responsible for the shutdown and the long TSA lines if they object to the Democratic unanimous consent request. And so it goes.

Hello, Mr. Desiderio, Punchbowl News sells access to Capitol Hill for corporate clients. Their senior Senate reporter is you, Andrew Desiderio. Here's how the access works: Punchbowl has a weekly show called "Fly Out Day," taped at the Punchbowl News Townhouse and described on their own site as an "exclusive first look" for Premium subscribers. Those Premium subscribers are the K Street corporate government affairs staff and trade association officials whose legislative interests depend on what Senate leadership decides to schedule… or kill. The second-ever guest was Senate Majority Leader John Thune, on September 11, 2025. This is documented in your own webste. Now let’s go over your post carefully. You say Mike Lee "primed the GOP base to believe" something. That’s manipulative framing, the language of a man working a crowd. But Thune "pointed out" something. That’s the language of a man correcting the record, establishing fact. This is not a one-off phrasing choice on your part. Your Punchbowl coverage consistently frames Thune's positions as institutional reality and conservative alternatives as base management. Thune "declared" that the talking filibuster is dead. Lee and his allies "captivated Trump's base." Thune "had enough." The SAVE Act push is "a self-inflicted wound." These are not neutral verbs. They are a point of view… and it's Thune's point of view, delivered with a byline. There's a structural reason this happens. Jake Sherman described Punchbowl's business model in his own words on The Rebooting podcast (January 2022): nearly 90% of the outlet's revenue comes from corporate sponsorships… "trade groups and companies looking to get their public affairs messaging in front of those making public policy." The sponsors documented at Punchbowl include PhRMA, ExxonMobil, Chevron, Facebook, JPMorgan, Blackstone, the American Investment Council (private equity lobby), and others. These sponsors need the goodwill of the Senate Majority Leader, who controls which of their legislative priorities come to the floor. Thune controls the floor. Thune sits in Punchbowl's townhouse. You reports Thune's framing as conventional wisdom. When Desiderio writes that the talking filibuster "will ultimately fail" ... not might fail, not Thune argues it will fail, but when it ultimately fails ... is that journalism? Or is it the view from Thune's Fly Out Day chair? You are busted, Mr. Desiderio.

Republicans want to rig US elections by only allowing US citizens to vote!!! How dare they 😡😡😡