(WASHINGTON) — Rep. Jamie Raskin, D-Md. announced Wednesday he has a “serious but curable” form of cancer and will enter outpatient treatment.
“After several days of tests, I have been diagnosed with Diffuse Large B Cell Lymphoma, which is a serious but curable form of cancer. I am about to embark on a course of chemo-immunotherapy on an outpatient basis at Med Star Georgetown University Hospital and Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center. Prognosis for most people in my situation is excellent after four months of treatment,” he said in a statement.
Raskin said he anticipates to continue working through the next four months but has been cautioned “to reduce unnecessary exposure to avoid COVID-19, the flu and other viruses.” He also joked that while he anticipated hair loss and weight gain during his chemotherapy, he is hoping “for the kind that causes hair gain and weight loss.”
“With the benefit of early detection and fine doctors, the help of my extraordinary staff, the love of Sarah and our daughters and sons-in-law (actual and to-be) and family and friends, and the support of my beloved constituents and my colleagues in the House, I plan to get through this and, in the meantime, to keep making progress every day in Congress for American democracy,” he said.
“My love and solidarity go out to other families managing cancer or any other health condition in this holiday season—and all the doctors, nurses and medical personnel who provide us comfort and hope.”
According to the American Cancer Society, the type of cancer Raskin has “tends to be a fast-growing (aggressive) lymphoma” but “often responds well to treatment.”
“Overall, about 3 out of 4 people will have no signs of disease after the initial treatment, and many are cured,” the group says.
The diagnosis marks Raskin’s second bout with cancer after he was successfully treated for colon cancer.
First elected in 2016, Raskin has swiftly emerged as one of the most prominent Democrats in the House. A former constitutional law professor, he played large roles in both of former President Trump’s impeachment hearings, experience that recently helped him clinch the top Democratic spot on the House Oversight Committee over a more senior member on the panel. He also serves on the special House panel probing last year’s insurrection.
(WASHINGTON) — New York Rep.-elect George Santos is facing mounting criticism from his future Democratic colleagues for fabricating parts of his biography — criticism that is coming from some of Santos’ fellow Republicans as well, though many in his party have not commented on the controversy, and some have defended him.
“GOP Congressman-elect George Santos, who has now admitted his whopping lies, should resign,” Rep. Ted Lieu, D-Calif., tweeted on Monday, pushing House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy to call a vote to expel Santos if he does not step down.
Texas Democratic Rep. Joaquin Castro also tweeted that Santos should resign or Congress should expel him, which would require a two-thirds vote, and that his actions should be investigated by authorities.
Rep. Hakeem Jeffries, the incoming House minority leader, spoke sharply of Santos last week.
“He appears to be a complete and utter fraud. His whole life story made up, and he’s going to have to answer that question: Did you perpetrate a fraud on the voters?” Jeffries, D-N.Y., told reporters.
“It’s an open question to me as to whether this is the type of individual that the incoming majority should welcome to Congress. That’s a question from Kevin McCarthy at this point in time,” Jeffries said.
ABC News has reached out to Republican House leaders Kevin McCarthy, Elise Stefanik and Steve Scalise for comment multiple times and they have not responded.
Last week, New York Attorney General Letitia James’ office said she was looking into a number of issues raised about Santos.
In a series of interviews, Santos — who initially pushed back on scrutiny of his biography — admitted to lying about or exaggerating parts of his background, including where he went to school and worked and past claims about his Jewish ancestry.
Santos apologized and sought to play down the discrepancies as “embellishing.”
“I am not a criminal,” he told The New York Post on Monday. “This [controversy] will not deter me from having good legislative success. I will be effective. I will be good.”
Republican lawmakers have largely remained silent on Santos. However, fellow New York Rep.-elect Nick LaLota released a statement asking the ethics committee to investigate.
“House Republicans like me are eager to be sworn in and focus on our commitment to America and our respective districts. Yet over the last few weeks, I have heard from countless Long Islanders how deeply troubled they are by the headlines surrounding George Santos,” LaLota said.
“As a Navy man who campaigned on restoring accountability and integrity to our government, I believe a full investigation by the House Ethics Committee and, if necessary, law enforcement, is required,” he said.
Another incoming Republican New York representative, Anthony D’Esposito, also released a statement condemning Santos’ actions but did not echo a call for an ethics investigation.
Nassau County Republican Committee Chairman Joseph G. Cairo Jr., in Santos’ district, said in a statement to ABC News on Tuesday that Santos “has a lot of work to do to regain the trust of voters and everyone who he represents in Congress.”
“I am deeply disappointed in Mr. Santos, and I expected more than just a blanket apology,” Cairo said.
He said that Santos’ contrition could be earned through a conservative legislative record.
“He must do the public’s will in Washington. Residents want him to deliver tax relief and pass laws that will make our neighborhoods and our nation safer,” Cairo said. “What’s more, George Santos will have to continually prove that he has learned his lesson.”
(NEW YORK) — New York Rep.-elect George Santos did, as promised, share some of his story on Monday in an interview with The New York Post, admitting that he lied about portions of his background while running for Congress.
Still, he vowed to take his seat in the House next week and do work on behalf of his district.
“I am not a criminal,” he said in the interview. “This [controversy] will not deter me from having good legislative success. I will be effective. I will be good.”
Santos, who initially pushed back on the “defamatory” scrutiny of his background, sought to play down fabricating his biography, saying he was “embellishing.”
He defended his actions in a separate interview with WABC radio that was also published on Monday.
“I’m not gonna make excuses for this, but a lot of people overstate on their resumes,” Santos said. “I’m not saying I’m not guilty of that.”
As The New York Times first reported earlier this month, some of Santos’ claims about his education, career and charity were disputed by public records and the schools and companies he said were involved.
In the Post interview, Santos admitted that he never graduated from college, despite publicly saying that he earned a degree from Baruch College.
The National Republican Congressional Committee website, which had a biography on Santos, also stated that he worked for companies such as Citigroup and Goldman Sachs. But Goldman Sachs and Citigroup spokespeople told ABC News that they have no record of Santos ever being employed.
Santos now insists he did business with the two large financial institutions as vice president of a company called Link Bridge. Santos told the Post that he stated his work experience “poorly.”
Santos was also accused of lying about his family history, having previously said that his mother was Jewish and her parents escaped persecution during World War II and resettled in Brazil. But The Forward, a Jewish news outlet, reviewed genealogical information and found that Santos’ maternal grandparents were born in Brazil.
During the Post interview, Santos said he’s “clearly Catholic” but maintained that his grandmother told stories about being Jewish and later converting to Catholicism.
“I am Catholic. Because I learned my maternal family had a Jewish background, I said I was ‘Jew-ish,'” Santos said.
Santos is the first openly gay non-incumbent Republican elected to the House. He said in a USA Today interview in October that he’s “never had an issue with [his] sexual identity in the past decade.” But reporting this month also found court records indicating that he had been married to a woman and they divorced in 2019, before a previous run for Congress.
Santos told the Post that he was married to the woman for about five years, from 2012 until his divorce in 2017.
“I dated women in the past. I married a woman. It’s personal stuff,” he said.
“I’m very much gay,” he said. “I’m OK with my sexuality. People change. I’m one of those people who change.”
Some discrepancies in Santos’ background were not addressed, such as a claim that he ran an animal charity.
According to an archived version of his campaign website, Santos previously said he ran a 501(c)(3) nonprofit called Friends of Pets United. But a search on the IRS’ website did not find a listing for a charity under that name.
Other lawmakers weigh in
Democrats have seized on the controversy, calling for Santos to resign.
“GOP Congressman-elect George Santos, who has now admitted his whopping lies, should resign,” California Rep. Ted Lieu tweeted on Monday, pushing House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy to call a vote to expel Santos if he does not step down.
Rep. Joaquin Castro, D-Texas, also tweeted that Congress should expel Santos, which would require a two-thirds vote, and that his actions should be investigated by authorities.
“It’s an open question to me as to whether this is the type of individual that the incoming majority should welcome to Congress. That’s a question from Kevin McCarthy at this point in time,” New York Rep. Hakeem Jeffries, the incoming House minority leader, told reporters last week.
Also last week, New York Attorney General Letitia James’ office said she was looking into a number of issues raised about Santos.
The matter had not advanced to an investigation but was rather characterized as a review of the claims raised in news reports and by Santos’ political opponents, ABC News reported. The attorney general has a particular interest in charities and charitable giving and about political fundraising.
Santos’ attorney, Joseph Murray, initially declined to comment on the attorney general’s involvement, saying he hadn’t heard from her office. After the Post interview was published this week, Murray referred ABC News to Santos’ press team, who did not immediately respond to further questions.
Nassau County Republican Committee Chairman Joseph G. Cairo Jr. said in a statement to ABC News on Tuesday that Santos “has a lot of work to do to regain the trust of voters and everyone who he represents in Congress.”
“I am deeply disappointed in Mr. Santos, and I expected more than just a blanket apology,” Cario said.
He said that Santos’ contrition could be earned through a conservative legislative record.
“He must do the public’s will in Washington. Residents want him to deliver tax relief and pass laws that will make our neighborhoods and our nation safer,” Cario said. “What’s more, George Santos will have to continually prove that he has learned his lesson.”
Republican lawmakers have mainly remained silent on Santos. However, fellow New York Rep.-elect Nick LaLota released a statement asking the ethics committee to investigate.
“House Republicans like me are eager to be sworn in and focus on our commitment to America and our respective districts. Yet over the last few weeks, I have heard from countless Long Islanders how deeply troubled they are by the headlines surrounding George Santos,” LaLota said.
“As a Navy man who campaigned on restoring accountability and integrity to our government, I believe a full investigation by the House Ethics Committee and, if necessary, law enforcement, is required,” he said.
Another incoming Republican New York representative, Anthony D’Esposito, also released a statement condemning Santos’ actions but did not echo a call for an ethics investigation.
Georgia Republican Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene tweeted in defense of Santos on Tuesday, arguing that the “left” was being disingenuous.
“The left doesn’t care about lying. … I’m glad George is being honest with his district now and look forward to seeing how George legislates & votes,” she tweeted.
ABC News has reached out to Republican House leaders Kevin McCarthy, Elise Stefanik and Steve Scalise for comment multiple times and they have not responded.
ABC News’ Aaron Katersky contributed to this report.
Sarah L. Voisin/The Washington Post via Getty Images
(WASHINGTON) — The House Ways and Means Committee is expected on Friday to release six years of former President Donald Trump’s tax returns, from 2015-2020, sources familiar with the plans told ABC News.
The returns will be entered into the congressional record during a pro-forma session on Friday beginning at 9 a.m., the sources said. Pro-forma sessions typically last only a few minutes.
A formal release will also come from the committee, which has already released a summary of some of the information from the records, including the annual taxes Trump paid.
Committee members voted 24-16 last week to release the documents after sensitive information — like bank account numbers and Social Security numbers — had been redacted, a process which is still ongoing.
Trump has long fought to keep his tax records private — though the courts ultimately ordered the Treasury Department to turn over his documents to the congressional committee, which had been seeking them since Democrats retook the House majority in 2019.
The committee had requested six years’ worth of Trump’s returns as part of what it said was an investigation into IRS audit practices of presidents and vice presidents.
Ways and Means Chairman Richard Neal, D-Mass., told reporters last week that the panel found there was no ongoing audit of Trump’s tax returns during his presidency until the committee requested them, despite an IRS requirement that tax returns filed by a sitting president or vice president are subject to audit.
Neal said the audit only began in 2019 after he requested the returns and said the audits of the requested returns were never completed.
Trump has accused the committee of seeking his taxes under false pretenses, claiming the probe is just a politically motivated fishing expedition. But the committee said the documents were critical for drafting “legislation on equitable tax administration, including legislation on the President’s tax compliance.”
The top Republican on the committee, Rep. Kevin Brady of Texas, previously said in a statement that “Ways and Means Democrats are unleashing a dangerous new political weapon that reaches far beyond President Trump, and jeopardizes the privacy of every American.”
(WASHINGTON) — A divided Supreme Court on Tuesday sided with a group of mostly Republican-led states and ordered the pandemic-era public health protocol known as Title 42 — which started in the early days of COVID-19 and allows the expulsion of migrants at the border — to remain in place pending a hearing before the justices.
The 5-4 decision reverses lower court decisions that Title 42 had to end in December and means that the policy will remain in effect until a final ruling.
The Supreme Court scheduled oral arguments on the appeal for February but said in a statement that “the stay itself does not prevent the federal government from taking any action with respect to that policy.”
In other words, in the court’s view, the Biden administration still has the power and prerogative to discontinue the policy on its own if it so chooses.
The court said it was preparing to examine a narrow, procedural question unrelated to the merits of Title 42 itself: whether the states challenging the policy may intervene to challenge the district court’s summary judgment order.
Justices Samuel Alito, Brett Kavanaugh, Amy Coney Barrett, John Roberts and Clarence Thomas, all members of the conservative wing, agreed to grant a hearing on the appeal.
Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan indicated that they would have denied the application from the states. Justice Neil Gorsuch — the lone Republican appointee not to vote to grant the request — and Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson also would have denied the application, writing in dissent that “we are a court of law, not policymakers of last resort.”
U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan previously set a Dec. 21 deadline to terminate the fast-track expulsion order, finding it “arbitrary and capricious,” with minimal public health impact despite its purported purpose to slow the spread of COVID-19.
That date will now be pushed back for several months until the Supreme Court holds its hearing and issues its ruling.
Nineteen states intervened after Sullivan’s decision in November. They have contended that Title 42 ending would create a “crisis” of unauthorized migration that would unduly burden law enforcement, education and health care services.
Their appeal was denied in December and the states filed an emergency application with Supreme Court Chief Justice Roberts on Dec. 19.
Roberts, who oversees the appellate circuit handling the case, initially granted a temporary stay later that day, allowing the court time to consider the application.
The justices have now agreed to hear the states’ appeal and issued a longer stay until after their decision on Title 42’s fate.
Migrant and civil rights advocates argue Title 42 illegally prevents people from making asylum claims while trying to enter the U.S.
White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said in a written statement that the Biden administration would “of course, comply with the order and prepare for the Court’s review.”
“The Supreme Court’s order today keeps the current Title 42 policy in place while the Court reviews the matter in 2023,” she said. “We will, of course, comply with the order and prepare for the Court’s review.”
Jean-Pierre called on Congress to pass comprehensive immigration reform.
“Today’s order gives Republicans in Congress plenty of time to move past political finger-pointing and join their Democratic colleagues in solving the challenge at our border by passing the comprehensive reform measures and delivering the additional funds for border security that President Biden has requested,” she said.
The Department of Homeland Security said in a statement, in part: “As required by today’s Supreme Court order, the Title 42 public health order will remain in effect and individuals who attempt to enter the United States unlawfully will continue to be expelled to Mexico or their home country. People should not listen to the lies of smugglers who take advantage of vulnerable migrants, putting lives at risk. The border is not open, and we will continue to fully enforce our immigration laws.”
In a statement, Lee Gelernt, the lead lawyer for the ACLU’s challenge to Title 42, said: “We are deeply disappointed for all the desperate asylum-seekers who will continue to suffer because of Title 42, but we will continue fighting to eventually end the policy.”
“Notwithstanding the Supreme Court’s ruling, nothing prevents the administration from revoking the Title 42 policy after notice and comment to the public,” Gelernt told ABC News.
“At the end of the day, this is not about whether temporarily Title 42 stays in effect or not,” ABC News contributor and former head of DHS intelligence John Cohen said. “It is about how — as a nation — we are going to address the crisis posed by the millions of displaced persons in Central and South America, who fled violence, persecution, COVID and economic crisis and who seek the protection and economic opportunities that come by their entering the U.S.”
“It is a crisis that will not be solved by political posturing, bus trips and calls to close the border,” Cohen added. “It will be solved through a cohesive and comprehensive plan that involves bringing together federal, state, local and private sector resources.”
ABC News’ Armando Garcia, Benjamin Gittleson and Luke Barr contributed to this report.
(NEW YORK) — Texas Gov. Greg Abbott on Monday pushed back against the White House’s sharp criticism of him busing more migrants to Washington, D.C., over the weekend — where they arrived outside Vice President Kamala Harris’ home on Christmas Eve in subfreezing temperatures.
“The White House is full of a bunch of hypocrites, led by the Hypocrite-in-Chief …. Instead of their hypocritical complaints about Texas providing much-needed relief to our overrun and overwhelmed border communities, President Biden and Border Czar Harris need to step up and do their jobs to secure the border—something they continue failing to do,” Renae Eze, a spokesperson for Abbott, said in a statement.
Abbott has been periodically busing migrants from Texas for months in protest of “reckless” federal border policies, he has said, and to provide “relief” to border communities.
A spokesperson for the Texas Division of Emergency Management said in September that the state had spent more than $12 million on the trips, which include charter buses and security.
The White House on Sunday labeled the latest busing a “cruel, dangerous, and shameful stunt.”
Amy Fischer, an aid worker who was outside Harris’ residence at the Naval Observatory, said that 139 migrants, including many families, arrived late Saturday in three buses and none wore cold-weather gear. The temperature was in the teens.
The people were subsequently taken to an area church, Fischer told ABC News.
Eze, Abbott’s spokesperson, said in the statement on Monday that the people who were bused “willingly chose to go” and “signed a voluntary consent waiver available in multiple languages upon boarding that they agreed on the destination.”
Eze then redirected the blame back on the federal government.
“They were processed and released by the federal government, who are dumping them at historic levels in Texas border towns like El Paso, which recently declared a state of emergency because of the Biden-made crisis,” Eze said.
The White House, for its part, said Sunday that they believed a political solution was still possible.
“As we have repeatedly said, we are willing to work with anyone — Republican or Democrat alike — on real solutions, like the comprehensive immigration reform and border security measures President Biden sent to Congress on his first day in office, but these political games accomplish nothing and only put lives in danger,” a spokesman, Abdullah Hasan, said in a statement.
(WASHINGTON) — The White House on Sunday said a politically motivated “stunt” led to migrants being bused in subfreezing temperatures to Washington, D.C., the night before.
It wasn’t clear who had transported the migrants. But Arizona Gov. Doug Ducey and Texas Gov. Greg Abbott, both Republicans, have for months been periodically sending migrants to Democratic-led areas of the country in protest of federal immigration policies, they have said.
Three buses arrived Saturday night outside Vice President Kamala Harris’ residence at the Naval Observatory, ABC affiliate WJLA-TV reported.
Temperatures in Washington on Saturday night were in the teens, according to the National Weather Service.
The migrants were reportedly brought to a local church and provided meals.
Abbott previously bused 50 migrants to Harris’ home in September.
“We’re sending migrants to her backyard to call on the Biden Administration to do its job & secure the border,” he tweeted at the time.
He told ABC News’ Nightline in August that “we’ve got to secure our border because the Biden administration is not securing it. And then the reason why we began putting people on buses in the first place is because the Biden administration, they were literally dumping migrants off in small little towns of 10 or 25,000 people, and they were completely overwhelmed.”
Abbott’s office said in August that more than 6,500 migrants had been taken by bus to cities like New York and Washington.
A spokesperson for the Texas Division of Emergency Management told ABC News in September that the state had spent more than $12 million on transporting the migrants, including charter buses and private security.
President Joe Biden has called such tactics “un-American,” “reckless” and “simply wrong.”
“This was a cruel, dangerous, and shameful stunt,” White House spokesman Abdullah Hasan said in a statement on Sunday.
“As we have repeatedly said, we are willing to work with anyone — Republican or Democrat alike — on real solutions, like the comprehensive immigration reform and border security measures President Biden sent to Congress on his first day in office, but these political games accomplish nothing and only put lives in danger,” Hasan said.
Abbott’s and Ducey’s offices did not immediately respond to ABC News’ requests for comment.
(NEW YORK) — There were 233,740 migrants apprehended along the U.S. southern border in November, according to U.S. Customs and Border Protection- a 1% increase from October’s record – breaking apprehensions and marked the highest ever number of border crossings ever recorded for the month of November.
CBP says there were 204,000 unique encounters that is up from 4% the month before. Of those unique encounters, 35% (68,000) were from Cuba and Nicaragua. The number of unique encounters alone is nearly two times the total number of encounters from the previous year at 174,845.
Two thirds of all encounters were single adult men who are often repatriated under the Title 8 statue while only 29% were repatriated under Title 42.
Title 42, the Trump era policy which expelled migrants under the auspices of the pandemic, is halted until the Supreme Court hears arguments on the case.
The timing of the release of the November border numbers, on the Friday before Christmas, irked some Republicans who have been critical of the way the Biden administration has handled the issue of immigration.
“November had the most illegal border crossings ever for the month with 233,740 known crossings — enough to fill SoFi Stadium more than twice over,” Rep. Young Kim (R-CA) tweeted. “This is only getting worse. I urge VP Harris & President Biden to visit the border firsthand so we can work in earnest on solutions.”
CBP touts the Venezuelan asylum program as working – going from nearly 1,100 Venezuelans a day to 100 at the southwest border.
Announced in October, the Department of Homeland Security said Venezuelans presenting themselves at the southern border would be returned to Mexico. They also said Venezuelans will need a sponsor in the United States to enter the country legally. That can be done online, a senior administration official told reporters on a conference call at the time of the announcement.
Fentanyl and heroin seizures, according to the data, both increased more than 50% according to CBP from the previous month.
“This month’s operational update reflects CBP’s dedicated workforce diligently enforcing our laws concerning immigration while seizing fentanyl and other contraband, ensuring America’s economic security and facilitating travel and trade,” said CBP Acting Commissioner Troy Miller in a release late Friday night.
(NEW YORK) — Former President Donald Trump responded publicly Friday night to the final report released by the House Jan. 6 committee, attacking the committee and refuting its findings that he was ultimately responsible for the insurrection at the Capitol.
“The unselect committee [sic] did not produce a single shred of evidence that I in any way intended or wanted violence at our Capitol,” Trump said of the voluminous report in a video posted to Truth Social. “The evidence does not exist because the claim is baseless and a monstrous lie.”
Trump, in the five-minute video, repeatedly downplayed the deadly events of Jan. 6 and pushed multiple unproven conspiracy theories surrounding it — including that the doors to the Capitol were “flung open for people to walk in” and that “federal informants” played a role in the violence.
“The events of Jan. 6 were not an insurrection,” Trump said. “They were a protest that got tragically out of control.”
Trump also continued to push the false claim that the 2020 election was stolen.
The former president also pushed back on the committee’s conclusion that he did not respond to the riot for 187 minutes, saying he issued two tweets “within 25 minutes of the Capitol bridge, and another statement 30 minutes after that.”
The committee’s report, however, said that “evidence showed that neither of these tweets had any appreciable impact on the violent rioters.”
“Neither the 2:38 nor the 3:13 tweets made any difference,” the report said.
Trump also repeated his claim that he had “urged the deployment of 10,000 to 20,000 National Guard troops” before the riot — a claim that the committee directly refuted in its summary report released on Monday.
“The select committee found no evidence of this,” the report said. “In fact, President Trump’s own acting secretary of defense Chistopher Miller directly refuted this when he testified under oath.”
(WASHINGTON) — The House on Friday passed a sweeping $1.7 trillion spending bill that will keep the government from running out of money at midnight and send an additional $45 billion to Ukraine.
The measure now goes to President Joe Biden for his signature.
The bill passed 225-201 with nine Republicans — Reps. John Katko of New York, Chris Jacobs of New York, Liz Cheney of Wyoming, Adam Kinzinger of Illinois, Brian Fitzpatrick of Pennsylvania, Fred Upton of Michigan, Rodney Davis of Illinois, Jaime Herrera Beutler of Washington and Steve Womack of Arkansas — supporting the bill. Democratic Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York voted ‘no’ and Rep. Rashida Tlaib, D-Mich., voted ‘present.’
“This bill is a critically important piece of legislation not only to keep our government funded, keep our people being served but also to show that the United States of America’s government works,” House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer said ahead of the vote.
“I ask all my colleagues to join me in voting ‘yes,’ showing the world that we will never remain idle in the face of those who believe they can terrorize civilians, devour our territory and commit more crimes with impunity,” he said, countering skepticism some Republicans have voiced about continued high-levels of funding to support Ukraine.
President Biden, who said in a statement just after passage that he’d sign the bill into law “as soon as it reaches my desk,” applauded its bipartisan support.
“This bill is further proof that Republicans and Democrats can come together to deliver for the American people, and I’m looking forward to continued bipartisan progress in the year ahead,” he said.
Biden signed a short-term funding bill into law later on Friday, officially averting a government shutdown ahead of the midnight deadline and giving legislators on Capitol Hill enough time to get the spending bill processed and ready for his signature sometime in the coming days.
House Republican leaders had told GOP members to vote against the bill.
As the last bill Democrats will pass while controlling the House before the GOP takes control of the House on Jan. 3, it was considered in a mostly empty chamber — over half of House members filed proxy letters — allowing them to vote remotely — after making it home ahead of treacherous winter storms set to disrupt travel before the holidays.
Some House Republicans, including current House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy R-Calif., had called for punting the issue to the new Congress.
“This is a monstrosity that is one of the most shameful acts I’ve seen in this body. The appropriations process failed the American public, and there’s no greater example of the nail in the coffin of the greatest failure of a one-party rule,” McCarthy said in a nearly 25-minute floor speech Friday, telling the body he would be a ‘no’ vote.
He said the omnibus spends “too much, increasing the deficit and fueling more inflation,” adding, “Why is the majority of Democrats not even here if it’s so good?”
As he finished, he said, “In eleven days this all changes. We are going to reclaim this body’s integrity and service to the American people. After this institution covers itself in disgrace, disgrace one last time under Democrat one-party rule. A new direction is coming. In eleven days, Republicans will deliver.”
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, in her final floor speech, called out McCarthy for his remarks.
“It was sad to hear the Minority Leader earlier say that this legislation is the most shameful thing to be seen on the House floor in this Congress,” she said. “I can’t help but wonder — has he forgotten about January 6?”
Pelosi, D-Calif., said Thursday she was hopeful the bill could pass that night, before lawmaker absences due to weather and the Christmas holiday. Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., had announced earlier on Thursday an accelerated process for passing the spending bill.
The House vote was pushed back to early on Friday, according to Hoyer, in order for members to get a chance to dissect the wide-ranging package. Still, McCarthy said on the House floor on Friday, members had little time to read the bill.
The vote came after the Senate struck a last-hour deal on Thursday to pass a version of the sprawling spending package, speeding through votes on 17 amendments that included both victories and compromises from lawmakers on both sides of the aisle.
It also came two days behind Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s historic appeal to a joint meeting of Congress, imploring lawmakers for the $45 billion in military, humanitarian and security money he claimed wasn’t “charity” but a contribution to the success of democracy abroad.
The bill keeps doors open for federal agencies through Sept. 30, 2023, and is set to head to President Joe Biden’s desk upon its expected passage despite some anticipated repudiation from a handful of GOP House members.
“Over two thirds and the United States Senate stood and said it is time to do our duty. And they did not because each and every one of those senators thought that this bill was perfect, it is not,” Hoyer said.
The legislation includes an increase in defense spending and military and civilian federal employee pay, disaster relief, medical services for military veterans, a ban of the use of TikTok on government-issued devices and reforms to the Electoral Count Act to avoid a repeat of Jan. 6 and attempts to overturn the 2020 election.
Senate passage of the bill did not include all requests from White House officials, such as additional COVID funding and an expanded Child Tax Credit.
It also did not include an amendment from Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, that would have kept in place Title 42, a pandemic-era policy which allows the expulsion of migrants on public health grounds that expired this week despite legal challenges waged by Republicans against its rollback. Another Title 42 amendment, introduced by Sen. Krysten Sinema, I-Ariz., and Sen. Jon Tester, D-Mont., also failed.
Still, Biden praised the legislation in his statement on Friday, highlighting it’s advancement of cancer and other disease research through his ARPA-H initiative, investment in community policing and further funding the Violence Against Women Act, among other tenants of the bill, like relief aid, Ukraine funding and veteran health care expansion.
“The bipartisan funding bill advances key priorities for our country and caps off a year of historic bipartisan progress for the American people,” he said. “I want to thank Senator Leahy, Senator Shelby, and Chairwoman DeLauro for their tireless work to get this done. Neither side got everything it wanted in this agreement – that’s what happens in a negotiation.”
Several additional amendments did pass, including two that expand pregnancy and breastfeeding accommodations and security in the workplace as well as a measure known as the 9/11 Responder and Survivor Health Funding Correction Act that funds a shortfall in the 9/11 first responder fund called the World Trade Center Healthcare Program. The amendment funds the program for another five years and authorizes $2.7 billion in compensation payments to the families of 9/11 victims, the Beirut Marine barracks bombing and other acts of terrorism.
–ABC News’ Alexandra Hutzler, Mariam Khan, Trish Turner and Allie Pecorin contributed to this report.
