Will admit that, in the *extremely* large number of hours I spent thinking about pandemic-era congressional operations between 2020 and 2022, "if one lies during testimony delivered remotely, where is one possibly indicted?" did not cross my mind.

No prediction, but here's the big tension imo: 1. Dems are facing pressure to "fight" for the sake of "fighting" in a way that is newer to them than to the GOP. 2. A shutdown is at odds with one of the core reasons someone becomes a congressional Democrat: government should work and do things.

One unexpected consequence of the Senate's recent changes vis-a-vis nominations? The absolute number it has done on the vote page on senate dot gov. So much more scrolling!

Knowing that the Senate lost some official papers in mid-2020 makes me feel better about any number of things my brain failed at during that year.

🟣11 New from @mollyereynolds.bsky.social @brookings.edu — "When It Comes to Its Spending Power, Congress Must Save Itself" Part of the Democracy Project’s @nyulaw.bsky.social w.bsky.social 100 Ideas in 100 Days series Read the full essay 👉

Good morning to everyone but mostly to the person who designed this pop-up that greets you on the House Appropriations Committee Democrats' web site.

Each year on this day, I return to this, and while it hits a little differently from one year to the next, I still feel this deeply each time. "I am only humbled: to be here, to be alive." www.mcsweeneys.net/articles/wel...

I am once again reminding you that behind so many stories you see about D.C. is a real city full of real people just trying to live regular lives and not simply a platform on which things happen. www.washingtonpost.com/immigration/...

The "we should have more younger members of Congress" conversation isn't just about things like whether committee chair term limits choke off paths to power. It's also about things like this.

On Lawfare Daily, @mollyereynolds.bsky.social, Zach Price, and Philip Wallach discuss pocket rescissions as an approach to cancelling funds previously approved by Congress. www.lawfaremedia.org/article/lawf...

If you need some pre-Labor Day weekend reading on pocket rescissions (and who doesn't), I have the list for you! You can start with GAO itself, which cuts to the chase with "Are pocket rescissions legal? No." www.gao.gov/blog/what-po...

If you are interested in learning about pocket rescissions (and I do believe there are...at least some of you), it's been a great 24 hours for new content. We've got (1) @bbkogan.bsky.social www.americanprogress.org/article/what...

Read this for the extremely important substance but please also check out the truly captivating photo of circa 1962 BLS employees generating graphs by hand that accompanies it.

16 votes over 3-5 hours on a Friday when everyone was hoping to have recessed already is a recipe for a room of full of people in really excellent moods.

Quiet part out loud, "why do congressional leaders like packaging spending bills together?" edition.

This is going to end up being about whether individual members of Congress have standing to sue and over what but this is a textbook limitation rider that the administration appears to be violating, and ignoring riders (spending $$ on things you've been told not to spend $$ on) is also a big deal.

This--from an amicus brief filed by 157 Members of Congress in one of the lawsuits against OMB's freeze on various federal funds--hits the institutional nail on the head. You cannot legislative effectively if you have no reason to believe that the executive branch will implement your choices.

Well friends, we've reached double exclamation point territory from Judge Sullivan. (From a minute order denying the government's motion for a stay pending appeal in the suit brought by CREW and Protect Democracy against OMB for taking down the legally required apportionment database).

This is like halfway to my greatest hits album.

Today @lawfaremedia.org has published two of my very favorite kind of thing: a very smart person who shares some object of my obsession but knows way more than I do explains it. First, @nicholasbednar.bsky.social's riff on RIFs: www.lawfaremedia.org/article/redu...

Today's edition of "quiet parts out loud":

This is the massive imbalance of power between Congress and the executive branch on $$$ in a nutshell: if individual GOPers care only about their own specific asks, and if the WH/OMB is willing to "fix" them, there's no incentive for a collective response from the GOP on behalf of the institution.

that sound you just heard was me shouting "finally, an answer to a question @sarahbinder.bsky.social and i have been debating for weeks!," in case you needed a reminder that the brookings 8th floor is an extremely fun place to work.

Between this and his work to bring Abrego Garcia back from El Salvador, Chris Van Hollen has earned a permanent place as my "constituency service isn't just flag requests and service academy nominations" example.

Hard agree--especially when taken in conjunction with the recent decision to contort themselves into acting contrary to the parliamentarian's advice regarding the Congressional Review Act. The stress test on institutional norms here is real.

Good morning to everyone drying off from the Byrd bath news; here are two questions to ask as we think about what comes next.

Is Thune a "the week begins on Sunday" or "the week begins on Monday" person?

It's one (bad) thing for Congress to mostly stand aside while the executive intrudes on its power, it's a whole other (worse) thing to actively undercut its own ability to stand up for its own choices by seeking big cuts to GAO's funding and trying to limit the Comptroller General's power to sue.

On today's Lawfare Daily, @sranderson.bsky.social and @mollyereynolds.bsky.social talked about President Trump's rescissions package, how it relates to the litigation over the president’s cuts to U.S. foreign aid, and what it signals about how the administration intends to handle impoundments.

It’s very easy to fly yourself in circles speculating about whether any particular provision runs afoul of the Byrd Rule. But zooming out with your binoculars for a second, there are two important questions to ask beyond “what’s the substantive impact of the provision?”

GAO weighs in on the legality of Trump administration's actions vis-a-vis libraries, not to be confused with the administration's actions vis-a-vis The Library (of Congress); questions about those are still outstanding. www.gao.gov/products/b-3...

Lawfare is hiring! We are looking for a new full-time senior editor. Responsibilities of the role include contributing analysis of key issues in national security law and policy and more. The ideal candidate will have a professional background in journalism, law, policy, or academia.

I was really excited to read this--on wtf is happening, legally, with the Library of Congress--and that was before I learned from it that @ajosephoconnell.bsky.social once defended the National Zoo's giant pandas. www.lawfaremedia.org/article/bure...

"popular demand" and "reconciliation" don't generally appear in the same sentence, but do join us Friday!

Should you still be interested in what the Senate did vis-a-vis the Congressional Review Act last week, do I have the write up for you (with thanks to @bridgetdooling.bsky.social for convincing me people might actually want to read this) www.yalejreg.com/nc/the-senat...

Going to need to be prepared to answer some questions about that lil' old U.S. Court of International Trade box in the corner of my Structure of the Federal Courts diagram the next time I teach, I see.

The similarities between my takes in the article and @mattglassman312.bsky.social's suggest that @gracesegers.bsky.social has enormous patience because she basically heard the same thing twice and I took *many* minutes to make my points.

Start your (EV) engines: we have a finding of a violation of the Impoundment Control Act www.gao.gov/products/b-3...

This *literally* just happened. I tried to take some time to answer a Byrd question only to realize I was missing the start of the CRA floor drama.

Gabe was kind enough to listen to me talk for many minutes about the difference between ignoring the parliamentarian and voting to overturn a ruling of the chair and quote me anyway.

"Changing my slides to indicate that the Budget Committee combining committee reconciliation submissions is not necessarily a box checking exercise" is to the 119th Congress as "changing my slides to reflect that not all suspension votes on are non-controversial stuff" was to the 118th, I guess.

I did not necessarily think we would get a re-run of "Chip Roy and Ralph Norman cause Republican leaders problems by virtue of being on Rules" with "Chip Roy and Ralph Norman cause Republican leaders problems by virtue of being on *Budget*" but he we are.

Stapler jam alert? Because reasons*, the House's reconciliation bill needs to go through the House Budget Committee as its next step.

As I attempt to untangle the situation with the CRA and California's emissions waiver, I've gone far enough back in time to have reached a point where Orrin Hatch was still alive and in the Senate, which is another way of saying I've never met a congressional rabbit hole I didn't like.

The prohibition on substantive changes to reconciliation submissions by individual committees to the House Budget Committee apparently includes not harmonizing punctuation choices.

I've thought for a bit that there are 3 parts to Trump world w/ possibly divergent interests: Musk/DOGE, the "punishing what we don't like" wing, & exec power maximalists. Who knew the illustration of this would involve...leg branch entities' appointment authorities? www.theverge.com/politics/666...

I am, as the bio notes, still not the Senate Parliamentarian. But when you find yourself staring at a provision like this--something in House text that appears to you to violate the Byrd Rule--there are four potentially overlapping possibilities, in no particular order.

I honestly never thought I would have to think about Brett Blanton ever again but here we are.

In addition to the large number of important actual conversations about this text, we are also undoubtedly in for an interminable discourse on the comma usage choices in the name of this title.