WASHINGTON — Congress will look considerably different next year, after dozens of its members move on to other political offices or retire, a number that’s likely to grow as some of those hoping to stay lose their reelection bids. 

A turnover of at least 13% will be the highest in more than three decades, bringing in a wave of new lawmakers, who will be looked to as a source of solutions for some of the country’s biggest problems. 

But the loss of institutional knowledge and negotiating expertise held by committee chairmen and seasoned lawmakers will not be easily replaced. 

Experts interviewed by States Newsroom said a surge of freshmen could lead to a further concentration of power in congressional leaders and heighten the influence of lobbyists, though they added there are benefits as well. 

“Serving in Congress is like any other job. It takes you some time to figure out how to be good at it,” said Molly Reynolds, vice president and director of Governance Studies at the Brookings Institution. “Even members who come in with state legislative experience, they will know some things about legislating, but they won’t know all the things about Congress.”

New lawmakers don’t often understand the more complicated procedures and practices, like budget reconciliation, which Republicans used last year to enact their “big, beautiful” law. 

“We ran the reconciliation process last year with lots of members who had never experienced a reconciliation bill before,” Reynolds said. “And one consequence of this kind of lack of experience is that that can stand to empower party leaders even more.” 

But, she added, there can be value in “having younger members, who have a different time horizon for thinking about some of the problems facing the country.” 

Generational change ahead

So far 57 House lawmakers, 21 Democrats and 36 Republicans, have opted to run for another political position or retire. In the Senate, four Democrats and seven Republicans are choosing to leave for one reason or another, according to data compiled by Ballotpedia. 

Jonathan K. Hanson, lecturer in public policy at the University of Michigan, said it can take a while for newer members to learn the policy landscape well enough to understand when to listen to outside influence and when not to. 

“A person doesn’t walk into Congress knowing how things work,” he said. “And the more that you have people who are fresh, kind of green, don’t know how to navigate the institution, the more power that special interests, lobbyists, so forth might have to influence the political process.”

Hanson also said that “some generational change is a good thing.”

Longing to be the chief executive

North Dakota Republican Sen. John Hoeven said many of his colleagues are opting to run for governor, which he believes is a superior role to the one he holds now. 

“I was governor for 10 years before I came here. It’s the best job you can have. It’s a better job than Senate,” Hoeven said. “I mean, it’s an honor to serve in the Senate, for sure. But you just can’t find a better job than being governor. So that’s totally understandable.”

More than a dozen lawmakers are running for governor, including Alabama Republican Sen. Tommy Tuberville, Colorado Democratic Sen. Michael Bennet, Florida Republican Rep. Byron Donalds, Minnesota Democratic Sen. Amy Klobuchar and Tennessee Republican Sen. Marsha Blackburn.

Virginia Democratic Sen. Tim Kaine said being a member of Congress can be difficult, leading some lawmakers to head for the exits and other opportunities.  

“This is not an easy job and people, you know, decide that they’ve had a good chapter and want to do something else,” Kaine said. “I can understand why people might make that call.”

South Dakota Republican Rep. Dusty Johnson, who is campaigning to be governor of his home state, said that every two years, the institution changes when more experienced members leave and newer ones are voted into Congress. 

“Every cycle, we always have plenty of retirements, certainly enough retirements to change the nature of the body,” Johnson said. “The bigger factor is, who replaces those who have left? And of course, we’re not going to know that until after the primaries and generals are wrapped up.”

Primary elections began in early March and will take place on different dates in each state through mid-September. 

Michigan Democratic Sen. Gary Peters, who is set to leave at the end of this year, said the impact of retirements will depend on which candidates Americans elect during November’s midterm elections.

“If you have people who are getting elected who are practical, common-sense problem solvers, that’ll be good,” Peters said. “If people are hyper-partisan, either left or right, that’s not going to be good.” 

Oklahoma Republican Rep. Tom Cole said the retirements from members of his own party could have an impact on the elections.

“Obviously, we’re losing some very good members. And it’s easier, as a rule, to defend an incumbent than it is to win an open seat, particularly in a challenging year,” Cole said. “But look, these things run in cycles. You just have to work your way through it.”

Travel, long hours, little satisfaction

Hanson from the University of Michigan said more Republicans have decided to retire or seek another office because their party is likely to lose at least one chamber of Congress. 

“They’re expecting to lose control of the House of Representatives, and it’s not very enticing for them to stay in the fight under those circumstances,” he said. 

The mounting challenges that come with being a member of Congress are part of the reason some lawmakers are planning to step aside from their current roles, Hanson said. 

“I do think that the job, while seeming glamorous from the outside, is not that glamorous from the inside,” he said. “There’s lots of travel. Even when you go home, you’re traveling around your district. It’s hard on family life. The hours can be very long in those late-night voting sessions. 

“And then that would be one thing if what you’re getting out of it is a positive sense of contributing to the broader good, to, you know, the idea of public service.”

But, Hanson added, there aren’t that many opportunities these days for lawmakers to pass legislation they believe is meaningful. 

“So I think it’s fair to say that while there are certain people who are attracted to being in the thick of this kind of scene, a lot of people find that it’s just not a very satisfying occupation,” he said. 

Zachary Peskowitz, a political science professor at Emory University in Georgia, said there are both pros and cons to more than 65 lawmakers leaving Congress at one time.  

“On the one hand, there are a lot of members who have a lot of seniority and have served for a long time and a lot of expertise but are in their 70s and 80s in some cases,” he said. “And there have been concerns about how engaged some of them are.”

Younger members, Peskowitz said, may “approach the job with more energy than you might get from somebody who’s been in Congress for decades.” Newer lawmakers will also likely come with different viewpoints and priorities, he said.

WASHINGTON — Sure, Sen. Thom Tillis has become the most visible, outspoken Republican insider critic of the second Trump administration. But don’t mistake Tillis for a maverick.

The North Carolina senator is being who he’s long been, the sort of GOP stalwart known as an establishment Republican. A Republican who’s conservative on fiscal issues, usually pragmatic on other stuff. A Chamber of Commerce Republican. A Bush-Romney Republican.

“Thom Tillis was, and is, best understood not as a moderate, but as a pragmatist,” said Christopher Cooper, author of “Anatomy of a Purple State,” which analyzes North Carolina politics.

“When he speaks, when he acts, and when he stays quiet is all calculated to achieve the goals he has in mind,” said Cooper, professor of political science at Western Carolina University. “With no chance for reelection, it’s simply that his speech now is less costly.”

Tillis is stepping down after two Senate terms. Over the last nine months, he has shown a more blunt public side.

“The only rational explanation I’ve seen” for his recent outspokenness, said veteran North Carolina Republican strategist Carter Wrenn, “is that he’s free of all the politics right now.”’

Tillis would not consent to an interview for this story.

Tillis vs. Noem

The latest, most public Tillis blowup came March 3, when he torched soon-to-be-former Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem at a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing. Tillis had voted last year, along with 51 other Republicans and seven Democrats, to confirm Noem as secretary.

This time, he talked about the “disaster that President Biden left behind,” and a “failed DHS.” But, he said, he was critical of Noem because of how she’s run the agency.

Tillis maintained an angry tone throughout his confrontation with the secretary. “What we see is a disaster under your leadership, Ms. Noem,” he protested. “Time after time I’ve been disappointed.”

He threatened to hold up unrelated U.S. Senate business unless he got satisfaction.

He cited a letter from her department’s Office of Inspector General, which noted several times she had made it tough for the agency to proceed with investigations of her department.

He recalled how Immigration and Customs Enforcement Agency agents shot and killed two Minnesota protesters in January, both U.S. citizens. “Why can’t we just say we made a mistake?” Tillis asked. Noem would not apologize during the hearing for the shootings.

Tillis brought up Noem’s dog, which she shot because it could not be trained, an incident that became famous after she wrote about it in a 2024 book while South Dakota governor.

“You decided to kill that dog because you had not invested the appropriate time in training. And then you have the audacity to go into a book and say it’s a leadership lesson about tough choices?” Tillis asked incredulously.

The willingness to distance himself from party orthodoxy was vintage Tillis. The unrelenting exasperation was new.

The establishment Republican

Michael Bitzer, professor of politics and history at Catawba College in Salisbury, North Carolina, described state Republicans this way: Two-thirds are firm Trump loyalists. The other one-third make up the traditional GOP.

That means their roots are often in “Chamber of Commerce, mainstream, party-oriented Republicanism rather than the personality of Trump,” he said.

These Republicans still tend to run the U.S. Senate Republican Conference, led by senators such as Majority Leader John Thune of South Dakota and former GOP leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky.

They have a long history of conservatism that tends toward a practical approach that gets the job done.

They teamed with Democrats in 2001 and 2002 to get President George W. Bush’s No Child Left Behind education reform passed. They wooed enough Democratic support in 2002 to authorize Bush to invade Iraq. They helped the party nominate Arizona Sen. John McCain for president in 2008 and former Sen. Mitt Romney of Utah four years later.

When Tillis first ran for Senate in 2014, he got the backing of Romney, who appeared in a television ad for the candidate. Former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie and former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush campaigned for Tillis. They were not Trump fans.

Tillis and Trump

When the “Access Hollywood” tape surfaced in 2016, a few weeks before the presidential election, showing GOP nominee Donald Trump making crude remarks about women, Tillis was critical.

“As a proud husband and father of a daughter, I find Donald Trump’s comments indefensible,” Tillis tweeted at the time.

Tillis, though, had a history of keeping the Republican faithful happy.

He stirred controversy in 2011, when while North Carolina House speaker, he said in a video, “What we have to do is find a way to divide and conquer the people who are on assistance.”

His examples: “We have to show respect for that woman who has cerebral palsy and had no choice, in her condition, that needs help and that we should help.”

But, Tillis added, “We need to get those folks to look down at these people who choose to get into a condition that makes them dependent on the government and say at some point, ‘You’re on your own. We may end up taking care of those babies, but we’re not going to take care of you.’”

In 2014, he told NBC News he regretted using the words “divide and conquer.”

As a U.S. senator, Tillis has voted with Republicans much of the time. He ranked 35th out of 100 senators in the nonpartisan GovTrack’s “ideology score,” which starts with the most conservative senators. 

Twelve Republicans had lower scores (just below Tillis was Sen. Markwayne Mullin, R-Okla., nominated by Trump to replace Noem).

Breaking with Trump

The most public, most noticed breaks have come in the last year or so. 

Tillis was sharply critical of Ed Martin, Trump’s nominee for U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia. Martin was controversial because of his ties to those who stormed the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. Trump wound up pulling the nomination.

The loudest schism came in June, when Tillis voiced concern with Trump’s “One Big Beautiful Bill,” signed into law on July 4. He went on to vote against the final version.

This was and still is the signature domestic achievement of the president’s second term. It extends the 2017 tax cuts and adds new ones. But it also cuts $1 trillion from Medicaid, the federal-state health insurance program that helps pay costs incurred by lower-income people.

Tillis called Trump’s health care advisers “amateurs,” and described how he did extensive research to assess the impact on his state. He found it potentially devastating.

“So, what do I tell 663,000 people in two years or three years when President Trump breaks his promise by pushing them off of Medicaid because the funding is not there anymore, guys?” he asked his colleagues.

Trump was furious. “Tillis is a talker and complainer, NOT A DOER! “ he posted on his Truth Social website.

The day after Tillis made his speech, he said he would not seek reelection.

He was free. His decision made political sense.

“It looked like he was free of constraints,” said Wrenn.

Next up: Federal Reserve

Tillis will soon be in the spotlight again, as he’s vowed to hold up Trump’s nomination of Kevin Warsh as Federal Reserve chairman.

While he sees Warsh as qualified, Tillis added that the Justice Department “continues to pursue a criminal investigation into Chairman Jerome Powell based on committee testimony that no reasonable person could construe as possessing criminal intent.” 

The investigation is connected to Powell’s comments about spending on the renovation of the Fed buildings.

“My position has not changed: I will oppose the confirmation of any Federal Reserve nominee, including for the position of chairman, until the DOJ’s inquiry into Chairman Powell is fully and transparently resolved,” Tillis said.

A federal judge last week blocked the Justice subpoenas to Powell, saying “the government has produced essentially zero evidence to suspect Chair Powell of a crime.”

Tillis is still not relenting.

“This ruling confirms just how weak and frivolous the criminal investigation of Chairman Powell is and it is nothing more than a failed attack on Fed independence,” the senator said in a statement.

“We all know how this is going to end and the D.C. U.S. Attorney’s Office should save itself further embarrassment and move on. Appealing the ruling will only delay the confirmation of Kevin Warsh as the next Fed Chair.”

Trump badly wants to replace Powell, thinking that Powell has been too unwilling to take steps to lower interest rates.

Classic Tillis

The Warsh drama is the latest vintage Tillis move, said congressional experts.

Tillis “is a creature of the legislature. He came with a very long legislative resume, knew how to play the game and was adroit at moving around and changing positions when it came to his advantage,” said Ross Baker, professor of political science at Rutgers University in New Jersey.

He also wanted people to remember he was pragmatic, willing to be independent. Warsh provides one fresh opportunity. The Noem hearing offered another.

The day after the Noem hearing, Trump fired her, the first person in his second-term Cabinet to be dismissed.

Tillis, Baker said, “wanted to leave a memorial to himself, which may be something like the end of Kristi Noem’s career as secretary of Homeland Security.”

After all, he said, “Tillis is a good government guy.”

WASHINGTON — Republicans and Democrats will spend billions of dollars and countless hours campaigning throughout the country ahead of November’s midterm elections, even though control of Congress likely will be decided by a relatively small number of toss-up races and the voters who actually turn out to cast a ballot for their preferred candidate.

There are just four Senate races out of 35 and 18 House districts out of 435 where each candidate has even odds of winning, according to analysis from The Cook Political Report with Amy Walter. The rest are categorized as leaning, likely or solidly for one party or the other. Some ratings potentially will still shift in a turbulent election year. 

When combined with the generally low turnout for midterm elections, which only topped 50% once during the last century, an especially narrow margin of Americans could determine whether President Donald Trump and Republicans retain their trifecta political control of Washington for the last two years of Trump’s term.

A Senate flip from Republican to Democratic control would have sweeping impacts, including which nominees for vacancies in the Trump administration, federal judgeships and any openings on the Supreme Court are confirmed. 

A House shift from red to blue would likely determine whether Trump and possibly members of his Cabinet face impeachment proceedings in that chamber. 

The most likely outcome experts see at this early stage is for Republicans to lose the House and keep the Senate, possibly with a slimmer majority in the upper chamber. However, that could change in the months ahead as primary election results determine which candidates advance to the November general elections. 

The first primaries are scheduled for March 3 and roll through September, with 16 in June alone.

Highly publicized efforts by several Republican and Democratic state legislatures to redraw the boundaries of their U.S. House seats could also be a variable. But, so far, neither party has gained any real advantage, according to analysis from Erin Covey, Cook Political Report’s editor for the House.

“While it’s not clear how many states will have new maps in 2026, we project that the likeliest scenario is a wash, with neither party netting seats due to redistricting,” she wrote. 

The stakes will be high for the handful of competitive general election races and the attention there will be intense. Leaders from both political parties, as well as outside groups, are likely to focus their spending and campaign ads on those relatively few contests and voters that will determine control of Congress. 

Trump impeachment fears

Trump has repeatedly lamented the historic norm that a president’s party tends to lose seats during the midterms, including in January when he addressed House Republicans at the Kennedy Center.  

“Whether it’s a Republican or a Democrat, whoever wins the presidency, the other party wins the midterm,” he said. “And it doesn’t make sense because … we’ve had the most successful first year of any president in history.”

Trump also warned that if Republicans lose the House, he’ll face impeachment proceedings for the third time. He was impeached twice during his first administration.

“You got to win the midterms because if we don’t win the midterms, it’s just going to be, I mean, they’ll find a reason to impeach me,” he said. “I’ll get impeached.”

Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., and Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., are confident GOP candidates will win enough races to ensure they maintain control over what bills come to the floor and which are held back from debate. 

“I think they’re going to give it to the grown-ups,” Johnson said during a press conference in early February. “I think the Republicans will be able to continue and grow our majority to keep governing.” 

Johnson said during a separate press conference he believes Americans should have confidence in the results of the midterm elections, but pressed for the Senate to pass a new, nationwide voter ID requirement that House lawmakers recently approved.

“I think we can trust the outcome of the election but what I will tell you is there is still a great concern that in certain pockets of the country that there’s not strict enforcement of the laws,” Johnson said. 

It is illegal for noncitizens to vote in federal elections and anyone found guilty could face fines and up to a year in prison. There are limited instances of people not eligible to vote actually casting a ballot, according to analysis from the Bipartisan Policy Center of data compiled by the Heritage Foundation, an especially conservative think tank. 

BPC’s examination “found only 77 instances of noncitizens voting between 1999 and 2023” and that “there is no evidence that noncitizen voting has ever been significant enough to impact an election’s outcome.”

Democrats battle for control

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, both from New York, are equally as confident as their GOP counterparts that Democrats will regain power, though primary elections are a factor.  

Jeffries said during a mid-February press conference he supports every single House Democrat seeking reelection, calling primaries “a reality” of the country’s political system while also taking a swipe at the Senate. 

“Every two years we have to go back to the people to make an argument, to persuade them to renew our two-year employment contract. That’s just a way of life,” he said. “It must be nice to have a six-year term. But we don’t have the luxury, so that’s going to mean in many districts across the country that there will be active primaries.”

Democrats need to pick up four more Senate seats to retake control of that chamber, particularly long odds given this year’s map. 

The Cook Political Report classifies Senate races in Georgia, Maine, Michigan and North Carolina as toss-ups, giving Democrats two possible additions if they can hold onto the open seat in the Wolverine State and Sen. Jon Ossoff of Georgia secures reelection. 

The open New Hampshire seat leans toward remaining in the hands of a Democrat, while Alaska Sen. Dan Sullivan and Ohio Sen. Jon Husted’s seats lean toward those Republicans securing reelection. 

The open Minnesota seat will likely remain blue, the report forecasts. The open Iowa seat and Texas are likely to stay Republican. The remainder of the Senate campaigns are rated as solid for Democrats or Republicans. 

Besides the 18 House seats categorized as toss-ups by Cook, another 14 lean toward Democrats and four lean toward Republicans. That means just 8% of House races are truly or somewhat competitive, though that is likely to fluctuate after the primaries determine which candidates advance to the general election. 

The GOP holds a very thin 218-214 House majority, with three vacancies, making even a few Republican losses highly problematic for that party’s leadership team and beneficial for Democrats. 

‘Even a few seats might make a difference’

Timothy M. Hagle, associate professor of political science at the University of Iowa, said during midterm elections “the party that’s not in control of the White House usually does pretty well, picks up some seats and so forth.

“And so, given how closely divided the U.S. House and Senate are, even a few seats might make a difference.”

Hagle said people who don’t feel strongly about one political party or another, often referred to as independent or swing voters, will expect candidates to provide solutions for “kitchen table issues,” like jobs, health care and the cost of living. 

“You’ve got to reach beyond your base if you expect to win an election,” he said.

But Hagle noted it’s increasingly difficult for politicians to convince people to vote, even as the internet and social media have become woven into everyday life, giving candidates a better chance to have their messages heard directly. 

Voter turnout data from the University of Florida Election Lab shows fewer than half of eligible voters cast ballots in midterm elections during the last century, with the exception of 2018, when it reached a peak of 50.1%. 

“And one aspect of this that’s a little more on the modern side is that our politics today is so partisan, it’s hyper-partisan, and I think it has turned a lot of people off,” Hagle said. “And so they really just don’t want to get involved in it.”

When that’s rolled in with mid-cycle redistricting in several states and the longer term decline in competitive seats due to gerrymandering, Hagle said, it’s led some politicians to change how they communicate with voters. 

“You do see attempts by the parties to talk about … things they’ve accomplished,” he said. “Republicans are in control, so they have to do this. And Democrats will say, ‘Well, here’s sort of what we want to do.’ But one problem there is that it’s often easier to motivate people through fear.”

“In other words, if a party is doing a good job, people will say, ‘Okay, good. That’s sort of what you were hired to do. So keep at it.’ Whereas if you say, ‘Oh, this party, if you leave them in control or put them in control, they’re going to do these horrible things.’ That tends to motivate,” Hagle added. “And that’s one of the reasons why you see such toxic messaging.”

WASHINGTON — Republicans, Democrats and the White House are methodically, calmly inching toward a common goal: agreeing on a thick package of laws that would do something quickly about slowing housing costs and boosting supply.

There’s no talk of gridlock here. No partisan sniping. Just an under the radar effort to show constituents in an election year that their lawmakers realize there’s a big problem when it comes to buying homes.

That’s why the House earlier this month passed its version of housing reform with only nine dissenting votes. The Senate committee writing similar legislation approved it unanimously last year.

While there are still some obstacles ahead before anything reaches President Donald Trump’s desk, what’s happening is almost a throwback to the days when getting 80% of one’s plan was a big victory, a policy prize to tout back home as midterm elections near.

“There is no silver bullet for fixing this problem,” said Rep. Mike Flood, R-Neb., chairman of the Housing and Insurance Subcommittee. 

But, he added, “I think that this bill, this legislation, includes a range of meaningful housing reforms that will add to housing supply and ultimately decrease housing costs.”

Housing shortage 

The House and Senate bills have a common purpose, said Emma Waters, senior policy analyst at Washington’s Bipartisan Policy Center. “Both bills really are pushing to make it easier to build more affordable homes,” she said. 

Rep. Emanuel Cleaver, D-Mo., a member of the House Financial Services Committee, explained the House bill this way: “It ensures that every dollar we do spend goes further.”

An analysis by the Zillow Group, a real estate company that researches home prices and trends, last summer found that in 2023, about 1.4 million new homes were added to the housing stock, but there were 1.8 million newly formed families.

As a result, the housing shortage was up to 4.7 million units. Other estimates put it as high as 7 million.

The typical home price in January in the United States was $359,078, up 0.2% from a year earlier, Zillow found. Prices depend on a wide variety of factors, including labor costs, cost of materials, interest rates, supply and demand and more.

What government can do

The congressional legislation tries to help ease supply and stabilize prices as much as the government can at this point. 

The House and Senate bills share several similar provisions. The  Bipartisan Policy Center, a Washington-based research organization, estimated that the House bill includes pieces of at least 43 different House or Senate bills, 27 of which have had bipartisan support.

Under the House plan, the federal Department of Housing and Urban Development would update the department’s construction standards for manufactured housing. The Senate bill has similar provisions.

Rep. John Rose, R-Tenn., a housing subcommittee member, explained the problem: “Municipalities across the country have restricted or outright banned homes built on permanent steel chassis. The result has been less construction, higher costs, and fewer opportunities for working families to own where they live.”

The House bill would provide money for “pattern books” for such housing that would feature pre-approved plans that could speed up the approval process.

The legislation would also provide “a lot of provisions to make it easier for state and local governments to reduce regulatory barriers,” said Waters.

The bills would allow money from Community Development Block Grants, which help fund neighborhood projects, to better support housing production.

The Senate bill would reward CDBG recipients that have, unrelated to their other CDBG projects, increased their housing production in the previous year. 

As a reward for building more housing in the previous year, those jurisdictions would receive additional CDBG funding, but there are still restrictions on how those funds can be used. 

The House bill, though, would change the restriction so that CDBG money could be used for housing construction.

Help for consumers

Housing experts believe a reason landlords balk is they’re reluctant to endure the government’s inspection process; the bills would streamline that process. Landlords would get incentives to accept tenants with rent vouchers.

The HOME Investment Partnerships Program, which aids state and local efforts to provide housing for lower income families, would also get a makeover of sorts in the bills. 

For instance, the House bill says environmental impact statements would no longer be needed for many projects, and it would be easier to tap money from the HOME budget.

Also likely to help consumers: making it easier for banks, usually community institutions that focus on local needs, to invest in more affordable housing. The House bill would raise the public investment welfare cap, allowing more such investments.

Rep. French Hill, R-Ark., was enthusiastic about this provision. “Our bill helps banks access stable deposit funding, streamlines the exam process that’s tailored particularly for our vital community banks, and helps promote more community banks to do what they do best, lend locally and support their communities,” said Hill, chairman of the Financial Services Committee, in a statement.

What’s ahead 

The banking provision is one of the few major areas where the Senate and House disagree. There’s concern among some Democrats that the House bill lifts too many bank regulatory barriers.

“We have a bipartisan bill with unanimous support in the Senate that will help build more housing and lower costs for the American people. I’m glad to see the House move forward on housing proposals,” said Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., top Democrat on the Senate Banking Committee.

But, she said, “House Republicans should not hold housing relief hostage to push forward several bank deregulatory bills that will make our community banks more fragile while harming consumers, small businesses, and economic growth.”

Also having potential to stymie negotiations is the White House’s eagerness to ban institutional investors from buying single family homes. There’s not much congressional support for that idea.

Trump last month issued an executive order telling “key agencies to issue guidance preventing relevant Federal programs from approving, insuring, guaranteeing, securitizing, or facilitating sales of single-family homes to institutional investors.”

Staying upbeat

There’s still a sense in the Capitol that Republicans and Democrats will come together on a major housing bill, particularly since Congress and the White House agree on most key provisions and leading interest groups are helping push legislation forward.

The National Association of Realtors has been enthusiastic about the House and Senate bills. 

 “By addressing barriers at every level of government, the legislation will make it faster and cheaper to build new homes,” the organization said after the House passed the housing reform  bill. The Realtors had similar praise for the Senate version.

The Affordable Housing Tax Credit Coalition also liked the House bill, as CEO Emily Cadik called it “a set of common sense, bipartisan housing proposals that would increase the supply of affordable housing.”

Most in Washington who follow housing policy closely are upbeat about the legislation’s prospects.

“It’s all pretty positive stuff,” said Waters.

WASHINGTON, D.C. — A broad coalition of trade groups representing ethanol producers, petroleum refiners, farmers, and retailers sent a letter to the co-chairs of the new E15 Rural Domestic Energy Council calling for swift action to deliver lower prices for consumers and a stable, efficient fuels marketplace. The letter outlines recommendations for consensus legislation to permit year-round, nationwide sales of E15 and improve long-term policy certainty across the transportation fuel sector.

“[T]he time window for arriving at a recommended legislative solution is short, with the council expected to submit legislative solutions to the full House by February 15th, only 16 days from today. We applaud this expedited time frame as fuel producers and retailers are making decisions now about product offerings over the next year, farmers are making planting decisions, and a legislative fix is needed as soon as possible to provide fuel producers and retailers with a predictable policy framework as we approach the summer driving season,” the organizations wrote.

To “achieve a solution in short order,” the groups urged lawmakers to build upon H.R. 1346, the Nationwide Consumer and Fuel Retailer Choice Act, that was amended and offered for consideration by Representative Adrian Smith (R-Neb.) last week before the Rules Committee. These include fixing outdated regulations on summer sales of E15 and limiting the marketplace distortions caused by Small Refiner Exemptions (SRE) under the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS).

“H.R. 1346 has broad support from the overwhelming majority of biofuels, agriculture, fuel retail, and oil refining interests, and is the most comprehensive pathway to a legislative solution,” the organizations wrote.

Signatories on the letter included the Agriculture Retailers Association, American Farm Bureau Federation, American Petroleum Institute, Corn Refiners Association, Growth Energy, National Association of Convenience Stores, National Association of State Departments of Agriculture, NATSO, National Corn Growers Association, National Sorghum Producers, Renewable Fuels Association, and SIGMA.

Full text of the letter can be found at GrowthEnergy.org.

The post Broad Coalition of Farm and Fuel Leaders Rally Behind Immediate E15 Fix appeared first on Growth Energy.

Tribal utility, localities, and consumer and environmental groups argue tax guidance illegally hurts renewable energy. WASHINGTON, D.C. (Dec. 18, 2025) – A broad array of groups with strong interests in clean and affordable energy sued the IRS and Treasury Department over new rules for tax credits that unfairly and illegally discriminate against wind and solar …

The post IRS Sued Over Anti-Solar and Wind Tax Rules appeared first on Alternative Energy HQ.

New Poll: American Voters Support Federal Investments in Electric Vehicles Broad, Bipartisan Support for EV Investments and Incentives that Lower Costs, Expand Access, and Help the U.S. Beat China in the Race for Auto Manufacturing WASHINGTON, D.C. – A new bipartisan national poll conducted by Meeting Street Insights and Hart Research finds broad public support …

The post Support for Electric Vehicles appeared first on Alternative Energy HQ.

WASHINGTON, D.C. (Feb. 7, 2025) – Late yesterday, the Federal Highway Administration?halted?new funding for state programs to install tens of thousands of new vehicle chargers along highways and at rest stops across the nation. A key part of the 2022 bipartisan infrastructure law, all 50 states have federally approved plans to build these fast chargers, …

The post New Federal Vehicle Charging Funds Halted appeared first on Alternative Energy HQ.

Current methods used to process hydrogen into a usable fuel are cost-prohibitive, but several new innovations are promising to open the door to cost-competitive green hydrogen. Hydrogen is well positioned to be the fuel of the future. However, a commercially viable transition to green hydrogen – the environmentally friendly version of the fuel – seems …

The post Fueling the Future: Unlocking Low-Cost Green Hydrogen appeared first on Alternative Energy HQ.