News

The regional board overseeing menhaden management along the Atlantic coast on Wednesday  advanced a measure to implement new restrictions on Virginia’s only reduction fishery that harvests the oily forage fish within the Chesapeake Bay. 

The Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission’s draft addendum would reduce the Bay-specific menhaden catch limits for the fishery, Ocean Harvesters, which contracts with Omega Protein. Other changes include harvest time period quotas to aid in menhaden migration.

Reduction fisheries catch menhaden in purse seine nets to then grind them up into fish meal and oil. Virginia is the only state that allows reduction fishing of menhaden within the Bay.

Currently, the Reedville-based Ocean Harvesters is allowed to catch 51,000 metric tons of menhaden within the Chesapeake Bay annually without any time period quotas. Last October , the menhaden management board voted to reduce the East Coast limit by 20% – bringing the catch limit to 186,840 metric tons for all fisheries, but leaving the Bay cap in place. 

Board members have raised concerns over whether menhaden populations are waning and potential repercussions of a decline. In past meetings, Maryland representatives have warned about impacts to pound net fishermen and small bait fisheries, and said various fish and bird species could go hungry. 

There are several options included in the draft addendum that the public will have a chance to review and respond to. One is to decrease the Bay cap by 10 to 50%.

Another entails quota periods that allow different percentages during certain parts of the harvest season, with special rules regulating the quota process.

The draft also suggests adding language directing the management board to either tie the Bay catch cap to coast-wide cap fluctuations, or to review the Bay cap every three years.

Concerns about catch limits for East Coast fisheries have grown following the decline of striped bass and osprey. Scientists have used those species as proxies for the menhaden population in the Bay, because there hasn’t been a Bay-specific study on the forage fish. 

Virginia this year allocated funding for in-depth Bay menhaden research, which will support a multi-year study into menhaden within the Chesapeake Bay and how policies could be shaped around the findings.

One of Virginia’s representatives on the board, Del. Adele McClure, D-Arlington, said it would be premature to pass an addendum before the study is completed, since it could have a major impact on the reduction fishery.

“I’ve heard a lot of ‘I think’ and uncertainty versus ‘we know this is happening, and we know this is the cause and the correlation,’ but I need to know that we’re putting out a complete picture to the public,” McClure said.

At the Aug. 5 public hearing, experts on osprey and other wildlife framed the dwindling numbers of these species’ populations as evidence of the need to manage the menhaden, because they are one of the key foods the birds feed on. 

Their observations about ospreys reflect continued debate about how other animals should factor into determining the health of the menhaden population. 

Bryan Watts, who studies ospreys extensively at the Center for Conservation Biology at William & Mary, said in recent years he has seen the number of the birds laying eggs in Virginia decrease by 20 to 30%.

“They come here, they arrive at the normal time, and they’ll sit there on the nest all season,” Watts said. “But they just won’t lay. And if you go back in time to the 1980s and 1990s, that rate was about 2%. So, it was rare. That’s why it was so surprising to us.”

On a research trip to the Ware River in the Northern Neck, Watts said the nests along the waterfront have lacked eggs and that the osprey are traveling inland to get food. Mehaden haven’t been found in the river for a long time, he said, which is part of the bigger picture of the fish population’s health.

“Menhaden are a public resource, and so it’s up to us, as the public, to decide how we want that resource allocated,” Watts said. “So if we want all of it allocated to industry, that’s a social decision that we can make. But if some of us care about the osprey and what’s happening with them, maybe we would like to allocate some of that public resource to them.”

Ocean Harvesters has vociferously denied the accusations that the fishery could be contributing to the lack of menhaden in the Bay or blocking them from migrating further into the waters towards Maryland. 

Representatives from the company suggested that detractors haven’t fully considered how the environment and other factors contribute to the situation. More data is needed, the company insisted, to make informed decisions on any potential restrictions.

“The addendum says menhaden availability ‘may be affected’ by changes in abundance and distribution and that recent observations ‘suggest that availability of menhaden in Chesapeake Bay may be changing,’” Ocean Harvesters said in an email, highlighting the lack of definite data  “to comprehensively characterize menhaden abundance and distribution in the Bay or the influence of fishing pressure.”

The company urged the board not to adopt the addendum, and flagged the negative economic impact to communities in Virginia that rely on the jobs provided by the fishery if the Bay cap is lowered.

“If Bay harvest were eliminated and vessels could not replace those landings in coastal waters, Northumberland County could lose as many as 176 jobs, including 98 direct jobs,” the company said.

The addendum will be available for the public to view through October and public hearings will be held across all the states represented on the commission before the board will take up the issue for final decision in November.

“You know we’ve worked on this addendum, and I think it’s time for the public to weigh in. The public wants to hear, wants to see this addendum, and they want to help us make a decision,” New Hampshire board member Dennis Abbott said.

• “Former Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin launches new conservative policy group.” — CBS News

• “Virginia primary sets stage for competitive midterm elections.” — WTOP

• “Virginia banned phones for every K-12 student, all day long: here’s what changed and why it matters.” — WSLS

• “‘No drama’ in Northern Virginia’s 2026 primary elections.” — WAMU

• “Lone mixed-use building at Virginia Center Commons redevelopment gets plan approval.” — Richmond BizSense

WASHINGTON — The stopgap spending bill supported by an overwhelming majority of U.S. senators does not address tens of billions in expiring transportation funding, leaving states facing a massive effective budget cut starting Oct. 1.

The 2021 bipartisan infrastructure law, which authorized highway and transit programs for five years, expires Sept. 30. Roughly $38.6 billion per year in extra federal transportation funding is set to expire with it, even if the continuing resolution the Senate advanced 89-4 Monday becomes law.

The stopgap measure, a version of which has also passed the House, would keep the government funded mostly at current levels, and reauthorize highway and transit programs through Dec. 11. 

But it would not renew the advance appropriations that provided $184 billion over five years for a host of transportation programs under the infrastructure law President Joe Biden signed in his first year in office.

Ben Gilsdorf, an associate legislative director for transportation at the National Association of Counties, said in a Tuesday interview that the advance appropriations funded many of the group’s top transportation priorities.

“It’s not all of the programs under (the infrastructure law) that would stop without an extension,” he said. “But for us, it’s several of the most impactful ones.”

The National Association of Counties was part of a broad range of advocacy groups representing business, labor, cities, state departments of transportation and every mode of transportation that signed a letter last month asking Congress to extend the supplemental funding.

Funding for Transportation Department programs makes up a bit more than half of the total advance appropriations in the infrastructure law, which also includes major funding for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the Federal Emergency Management Agency, Energy Department and telecommunications program. 

The total advance appropriations for fiscal 2026 were about $66.2 billion, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office.

Bridges, airports, transit and more

The DOT funding largely flows to state departments of transportation. 

Returning to pre-2021 baseline infrastructure spending would leave every state with less federal funding to cover varied transportation needs.

About 30%, $10.8 billion per year, of the extra transportation funding is determined by formula, meaning the amounts sent to each state vary based on population, highway miles and other factors.

California is the only state that would lose 10 figures worth of funding, at nearly $1.1 billion. 

But even Vermont, the state with the lowest total funding lost, would see $55.6 million less in formula funds if the funding is not extended, according to data Senate Appropriations Committee Vice Chair Patty Murray of Washington sent to her fellow Democratic senators last month.

(function(){function e(){window.addEventListener(`message`,function(e){if(e.data[`datawrapper-height`]!==void 0){var t=document.querySelectorAll(`iframe`);for(var n in e.data[`datawrapper-height`])for(var r=0,i;i=t[r];r++)if(i.contentWindow===e.source){var a=e.data[`datawrapper-height`][n]+`px`;i.style.height=a}}})}e()})();

A total of 10 formula programs representing different modes of transportation would be affected, according to the fact sheet from Murray’s office.

More than half of the formula funding, $5.5 billion, is slated for the Federal Highway Administration’s bridge repair program. 

Airport construction funds represent the next-greatest funding at $3 billion per year. The Federal Transit Administration’s grant program to maintain transit system infrastructure would lose $950 million and state transportation departments would lose another $900 million in federal funding for electric vehicle charging stations.

Other affected programs are for highways in Appalachian states, truck safety inspections, ferry boats and terminals, FTA grants for senior passengers and those with disabilities and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration programs.

In addition to formula funds, the remaining 70% of advance appropriations is distributed via 25 competitive grant programs, according to the Murray document.

Grant programs to fund ports, large highway and rail projects, transit station upgrades, roadway safety and other projects would be among those losing funding.

Complicating spending negotiations 

While the law that initiated the additional funding was bipartisan, there are indications an extension could be a more partisan issue.

Murray said ahead of the Senate floor vote Monday that Republicans did not “agree to our efforts to extend critical advance appropriations for infrastructure” and vowed to continue pursuing the additional funds.

Appropriations Chair Susan Collins, a Maine Republican, did not reference advance appropriations in a press release announcing a deal on the stopgap bill. 

Republicans, who hold majorities in both chambers of Congress, may prefer to settle the future of the funding through a long-term surface transportation bill or full-year appropriations measure, Gilsdorf said.

Even if the Senate bill is enacted, there will be an opportunity when it expires to revisit the issue, he said.

“There’d be another bite at the apple,” he said.

A person familiar with negotiations who was not authorized to speak on the record said Tuesday that the advance appropriations in the 2021 law were meant to be one-time funding, and that extending them in a stopgap measure meant to preserve the status quo would be inappropriate.

The funding is part of a larger policy debate than is usually considered in a continuing resolution, the person said.

The issue could hang over negotiations for full-year spending bills, likely to begin in earnest after November’s elections. 

Senate appropriators have not reached a deal for top-line spending levels for fiscal 2027. 

Republicans, at President Donald Trump’s urging, are seeking a massive boost to defense programs. 

Democrats historically seek parity between non-defense and defense spending, but have relaxed that stance while the extra infrastructure funds have been flowing. Without that additional funding, Democrats might be less amenable to compromise.

After years of bipartisan deliberation, U.S. Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., has introduced legislation to strengthen and protect a federal drug pricing program. 

Known as 340B, the program has helped Virginia hospitals and clinics and others nationwide care for underserved patients by requiring pharmaceutical companies offer prescription discounts to qualifying providers. 

By purchasing drugs at steep discounts while charging insurers full prices, participants are meant to pocket the difference, which helps providers stretch their dollars and invest in additional clinics, staff or programming.

But some hospital chains were caught taking advantage of the program to shortchange patients, and state and federal lawmakers have spent years weighing potential reforms. 

To strengthen the program, Kaine’s new bill would prescribe new annual reporting requirements for participants and give the Department of Health and Human Services auditing authority. 

HHS would also be authorized to remove noncompliant entities who do not implement corrective action plans. 

A pillar of the bill, Kaine said, is protecting up-front discounts for participating providers rather than the rebate model some of his colleagues and President Donald Trump have favored. 

While larger hospital chains that utilize 340B may have the cash flow to manage a rebate model, smaller entities that primarily serve low-income or uninsured patients are “not providers that tend to have bank accounts with money sitting around unused,” Kaine explained. 

“If you require them to pay fully up front and then get a rebate sometime down the road, you really jeopardize their operations,” he said.

Earlier this summer, outgoing Louisiana Sen. Bill Cassidy, a Republican, introduced a model policy that diverges slightly from Kaine’s proposal and would implement a rebate model. 

Efforts to reform federal drug pricing program 340B continue with new report, proposed CMS rule

Cassidy, a former doctor and Kaine have been longtime participants in the bipartisan workgroup that has explored reshaping 340B.

The question of whether 340B’s growth should be scaled back is another key part of the debate. 

To qualify for 340B and increase the scope of the program in their operations, hospitals sometimes partner with contract pharmacies to improve access for patients or purchase outside clinics, branding them “child sites.”

Kaine’s bill would put “reasonable limitations” on contract pharmacies without specifically capping how many of them hospitals can have. It would also subject health systems with large numbers of such pharmacies to audits.

Additionally, the bill offers guidance for child sites by requiring they be wholly owned and integrated into the parent system. HHS would have registration and oversight procedures. 

The move is meant to disincentivize hospitals from purchasing child sites solely to expand their 340B footprint to increase savings. 

Federally Qualified Health Centers and clinics have long been subject to reporting requirements to ensure their 340B savings are being utilized properly, but hospitals haven’t. 

Health systems’ inflated participation in the program over the years “led to this odd situation where they had less requirements,” Kaine said. 

If it becomes law, his bill would also establish a clearinghouse operated by a third-party entity to catch and prevent duplicate discounts or diversion discounts,  when discounted 340B drugs are routed to ineligible patients for entities to try to glean additional savings. 

Ohio-based hospital chain with facilities in Va. said to profiteer from massive charity-care program

“I think we’ve really tried to grapple with the two big issues,” Kaine said, naming cost growth and misuse of the program as the biggest challenges the legislation seeks to address. “We’ve done it in a way to preserve the core intent of what 340B is.” 

Kaine’s cosponsors on the legislation include Republicans Jerry Moran from Kansas, Shelley Moore Capito from West Virginia and John Boozman from Arkansas.  Democrats Tammy Baldwin of Wisconsin and John Hickenlooper of Colorado are also joint sponsors. 

Congress tackling the measure before the end of the year could be a legislative win for both parties and the president, Kaine said. But even if the bill doesn’t advance quickly, he said the lawmakers pressing for its passage “aren’t going anywhere.”

WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump is urging Republican senators to “release their holds” and pass a measure making daylight saving time permanent nationwide.  

A bipartisan bill passed the House in July but faces hurdles in the Senate, where members from both parties have pushed back against ending the semiannual clock changes. 

“People are sick and tired of having to change their clocks twice a year,” Trump wrote in a social media post Tuesday night, adding that “it is foolish, inconvenient and, in some cases, very costly.” 

Trump said “this is an issue that Republicans, Democrats, and Independents can unite behind” while asking GOP senators to “release their holds, and allow the hotline to clear on the Republican side.” Members of the Senate are scheduled to adjourn for an August recess later this week, though it’s also possible they may get delayed by pending legislation.

The president also flexed the benefits of ceasing the semiannual clock changes, saying “leading Medical, Crime, and Economic Studies” show it would help decrease robbery and murder rates, reduce car accidents, lower risk for cardiac issues, stroke and seasonal depression and also make it safer for children to get home from school, among other advantages. 

Florida GOP Rep. Vern Buchanan introduced the measure in the House — dubbed the Sunshine Protection Act — which passed it, 308-117. 

But the Senate has yet to take up the legislation, with at least one fierce critic of the move, GOP Sen. Tom Cotton of Arkansas, having argued in a floor speech last year that making daylight saving time permanent would “push winter sunrises to an absurdly late hour, depriving Americans of morning sunshine that’s essential for our safety and well-being.” 

Cotton also noted that the darkness from making daylight saving time permanent would be “especially harmful for schoolchildren and working Americans.” 

Meanwhile, GOP Sen. Rick Scott of Florida, who sponsored a companion bill in January 2025, celebrated the House’s passage and urged the Senate to “take it up NOW and send it to President Trump’s desk,” per a July social media post. 

• “Virginia girds for data center-focused House races.” — E&E News by Politico

• “VDH investigating dengue virus in Northern Virginia, first-ever documented case of virus being acquired locally.” — WSLS

• “​​Gov. Spanberger opens applications for new Virginia corrections advisory council.” — WCYB

• “Petersburg area residents fight back against data centers.” — The Progress-Index

• “Insights from Virginia Tech experts as autonomous warfare moves to the water.” — Ocean News & Technology

Virginia is closer to regulating self-driving vehicles, which have steadily increased nationwide despite continued concerns over safety.  

Despite crashes that have led to restrictions in some areas, other states, such as Arizona and Texas, have continued to permit testing and deployment. With interest in the technology growing in Virginia, lawmakers are trying to get ahead of some of the issues that have arisen. 

Last year, Virginia leaders signed off on a plan to bring transportation officials, law enforcement, state lawmakers, and various experts together in a work group to consider rules around the use of autonomous vehicles, such as safety, liability, privacy and cybersecurity, and operational rules.

Much of the time at the group’s July 24 meeting focused on maintaining a consistent, statewide approach to permitting and operations, warning against a fragmented regulatory environment, often referred to as “balkanization,” where individual localities might create conflicting rules for AV companies.

“I think we pride ourselves in having a very uniform Department of Transportation across the entire commonwealth and so, therefore, with the exception of maybe Dulles and DCA, I don’t think that we want to go down the path of allowing localities to determine where, when, or how autonomous vehicles are going to be used,” Del. David Reid, D-Loudoun, said at the meeting.

He added, “We need to kind of adhere to what we have proven already works and not try to have 133 different thoughts and jurisdictions about how we are going to implement autonomous vehicles.”

Virginia’s participation in the AV market is of interest to the public because some advocates have said the technology can make transportation more affordable and provide more access. Experts are still studying the safety, traffic, and labor implications of AVs.

Safety

Work group staff and consultants recommended a multi-stage regulatory framework and permitting process to evaluate the safety of autonomous vehicles before and during their operation on Virginia’s public roads.

Staff recommended that legislation should focus on two levels of automation: conditional and high automation. Conditional automation is when a human driver is required to take over driving if the system can no longer operate, and high automation is when a human driver is not needed since the system is fully responsible for driving.

The work group also recommended limiting permits to commercial AVs, giving time for further testing and deployment of commercial vehicles before personal vehicles are authorized for permitting.

Liability

Right behind safety is liability, especially during crashes. Staff said the Virginia Department of Motor Vehicles should have the authority to deny, suspend or revoke permits for violations or if operations pose a public danger.

Two options the work group will consider are proof of coverage with options for standard or higher pilot-phase insurance limits. The standard limit is $50,000 per person, $100,000 per incident for all bodily injuries and $25,000 property damage. If the self-driving vehicle is being used as a for-hire vehicle, it may need up to $5 million in insurance coverage.

Privacy and cybersecurity

Virginia will also have to consider measures to protect privacy and cybersecurity, because AVs depend on large amounts of data and digital systems to operate and make safety-critical decisions.

Staff said Virginia could enact new privacy provisions in addition to its Virginia Consumer Data Protection Act, which gives consumers more privacy and control over their digital information like location, driving and passenger information.

Staff said the law seems to apply, but is limited to companies that collect personal information from 100,000 or more Virginia residents in a year, or 25,000 or more Virginia residents in a year and make more than half of their revenue from selling personal data.

Operational rules

Virginia lawmakers will also decide when and where the commonwealth will allow self-driving vehicles to operate as part of the regulation development process.

Staff recommended lawmakers avoid introducing new types of permits and certificates. Instead, they said establish general rules for all businesses that use AVs so the regulatory framework stays workable.

This keeps the process simple, avoiding unnecessary steps and saving time and paperwork for both the AV industry and the Department of Motor Vehicles. 

Currently, the DMV issues permits and certificates to different types of businesses that transport passengers or property for hire, like household moving companies. The DMV does not regulate food and personal delivery transportation.

Bradley Calhoun, founder of disability service provider Ember Initiatives, was the only speaker at the July work session. He urged the working group to incorporate accessibility planning at the beginning of the design process, saying existing transportation often creates barriers for adults with intellectual and developmental disabilities, such as restricted destinations and unreliable pickup windows.

“I respectfully ask the work group to include people with intellectual disabilities, developmental disabilities, sensory communication, physical disabilities, and the providers who support them in Virginia’s pilot permitting accessibility and data reporting discussions,” Calhoun said last month. “This technology should expand independence while creating and strengthening human support roles, not simply eliminating them.”

The workgroup is expected to issue a final report to the General Assembly no later than Nov. 1.

More of the cost to build the high-voltage transmission lines that serve as power highways across the state could soon be covered by data centers, after a recent decision by state regulators.

The State Corporation Commission has ordered Dominion Energy to develop a policy to directly assign the cost of transmission infrastructure to data centers and other large-load users that  connect to the facilities, “with the goal of finding an acceptable and symmetrical approach towards assigning costs in these circumstances.”

In the latest rate adjustment case for Dominion’s “rider T1” that covers the cost to build the transmission lines and substations, the company argued that data centers and other companies in their class should have to shoulder more of the cost of the power infrastructure that is necessary only to power their facilities. 

In a rare move, Gov. Abigail Spanberger’s administration weighed in on the case, with officials stating that data centers should be paying their “fair share,” and that residential customers shouldn’t have to pay for power infrastructure solely used by data centers.  

“Any network or substation upgrades that would not have been triggered but for a large load customer should be assigned directly to that customer, shielding regular Virginia families from subsidizing commercial extension,” Deputy Chief Energy Officer Louise White testified during a hearing in July.

In the final order, the commission recognized that even  the possible new tariff  “may not address all instances in which a utility may incur transmission related costs to address transmission system reliability criteria violations that appear to be directly caused by the addition of one or more large-load customers.” 

Dominion has reported 203 transmission projects in its grid connection pipeline, according to the company’s 2024 integrated resource plan.

Environmental groups cheered state regulators’ move this week. 

“The decision establishes an important precedent: Virginia families and small businesses should not subsidize transmission infrastructure built solely to connect new large-load data centers,” said Chris Miller, president of the Piedmont Environmental Council, one of the intervening parties in the case.

The forthcoming Valley Link transmission line is an example of a project which, in the future, could be “directly assigned to the GS-5 rate class” or other alternatives, commissioners also said.

The regional grid operator allowed Dominion and other utilities to develop plans for the 115-mile, 765 kilovolt transmission line that is anticipated to stretch from Lynchburg to Culpeper to push more power to Northern Virginia, where most of the state’s data centers are concentrated. 

“This order — which is projected to save Virginians hundreds of millions of dollars — makes sure that data centers are paying the full cost of the transmission infrastructure their developments require,” Spanberger said in a statement. 

The governor pledged to work with state lawmakers in future legislative sessions to ensure data centers “pay their fair share, adhere to strict environmental standards, and listen to the concerns of local communities.”

Dominion asked the commission to recover $1.5 billion, which would translate to about a $.94 monthly increase for the average customer. The company originally asked for a $2.90 monthly increase but recalculated its formula to levy more costs onto data centers and factored in the new high-load user GS5 rate class that established a 85% transmission demand rate.  

It is not clear when the SCC will rule on the new transmission tariff for data centers and what the exact savings for residential customers will be. 

Virginians cast their ballots Tuesday in an unusually-timed primary that settled a statewide Republican contest for the U.S. Senate and determined several of Virginia’s most closely watched congressional matchups for the November election.

Retired U.S. Army Maj. Gen. Bert Mizusawa won the GOP’s nomination to challenge longtime Democratic U.S. Senator Mark Warner, while incumbents and former members of Congress emerged victorious in a number of the night’s marquee House races. 

This year’s primary was held nearly two months later than usual, after Virginia lawmakers postponed the traditional June nominating contest to accommodate April’s redistricting referendum. The Supreme Court of Virginia later struck down the new map, leaving candidates to compete under the existing district lines. 

U.S. Senate

Mizusawa defeated U.S. Navy veteran and political outsider David Williams with 50.71% to 29.54% of the vote, according to unofficial results reported by the Virginia Department of Elections at 8:35 p.m.

Businesswoman Kim Farington came in third with 19.75%.  

A former Pentagon official, Mizusawa built his campaign around his military and public service background, emphasizing national security, military readiness, federal spending and energy policy. He advances to face Warner, who is seeking a fourth six-year term in a state that has not elected a Republican to the U.S. Senate since 2002. 

1st District 

Democratic voters in the 1st Congressional District nominated Henrico County Commonwealth’s Attorney Shannon Taylor with 53.23% of the vote.

Taylor, Henrico’s top prosecutor since 2012 and an unsuccessful 2025 candidate for attorney general, will face U.S. Rep. Rob Wittman, R-Westmoreland, who has represented the district since 2007.

Taylor finished ahead of public-interest attorney Salaam Bhatti (19.93%), U.S. Navy Navy veteran and energy lobbyist Jason Knapp (9.95%), U.S. Army veteran Elizabeth Dempsey Beggs (6.71%), business lawyer Mel Tull (4.48%), environmental advocate Tim Cywinski (2.91%), and healthcare attorney Ericka Kopp (2.79%). 

2nd District

Former U.S. Rep. Elaine Luria earned the Democratic nomination in the highly competitive 2nd District with 79.14% of the vote. The district remains Virginia’s most vulnerable Republican-held seat and is among 18 House races rated as toss-ups by the Cook Political Report. 

A retired U.S. Navy commander, Luria represented the district for two terms before losing to Republican Jan Kiggans in 2022. Tuesday’s victory sets up a rematch with Kiggans. 

Luria defeated physician Nila Devanath (17.53%), physicist and veteran official Bill Fleming (2.07%) and former U.S. Agency for International Development employee Patrick Mosolf (1.26%).

5th District

Voters in the 5th District settled competitive primaries in both parties. 

First-term Republican U.S. Rep. John McGuire of Goochland secured his renomination with 85.74% of the vote, defeating Marine veteran and business owner Melanie Lucero (14.26%).

McGuire, a former Navy SEAL and state delegate, narrowly defeated then-U.S. Rep. Bob Good in the 2024 Republican primary before winning the seat that November.

On the Democratic side, former U.S. Rep. Tom Perriello prevailed with 78.24% of the vote. 

Perriello represented the district from 2009 to 2011, later sought the governorship in 2017 and served in diplomatic posts during the Obama and Biden administrations. He defeated physician Suzanne Krzyzanowski (15.49%) and writer Robert Tracinski (6.27%) and will face McGuire this fall.

7th District

In the 7th District, Republican voters selected Douglas Ollivant with 56.42% of the vote to challenge Democratic U.S. Rep. Eugene Vindman of Woodbridge in November.

A retired U.S. Army officer and national security analyst, Ollivant campaigned on domestic manufacturing, energy production, job growth and reducing federal regulation.

He finished ahead of entrepreneur Philip Harding (30.77%) and pastor and construction company owner Rick Smithers (12.81%). Vindman, also a retired Army officer, was unopposed for the Democratic nomination.

8th District

Six-term Democratic U.S. Rep. Don Beyer of Alexandria turned back four primary challengers in the 8th District, winning 66.89% of the vote. 

Beyer, a former Virginia lieutenant governor and U.S. ambassador to Switzerland and Liechtenstein, has represented Northern Virginia in Congress since 2015 and has focused recently on clean energy, artificial intelligence and assistance for displaced federal workers.

He defeated former Alexandria City Councilman and U.S. Labor Department attorney Mo Seifeldein (18.12%), former CIA officer and Marine veteran Adam Dunigan (9.22%), former U.S. State Department employee Michael Duffin (3.26%) and Stafford County teacher Lorena Bruner (2.51%). 

Beyer advances to face Republican Tony Sabio, who ran unopposed for the GOP nomination.

9th District

Bedford County farmer and small-business owner Joy Powers captured the Democratic nomination with 49.30% of the vote in Virginia’s heavily Republican 9th District. Powers brings a background in agricultural development, foster care advocacy and leadership of the Bedford County Fair.  

She will challenge Republican U.S. Rep. Morgan Griffith of Salem, who has represented the district since 2011 and was unopposed. 

Powers defeated Software developer Adam Murphy (38.50%) and United Methodist pastor and attorney Douglas Crockett (12.20%). 

10th District

Retired U.S. Airforce Col. and former Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense David Beckwith won the Republican nomination in the 10th District with 72.50% of the vote. 

Beckwith, who has centered his campaign on national security and government management, will face first-term Democratic U.S. Rep. Suhas Subramanyam of Loudoun County in November. 

Beckwith defeated Fairfax County teacher and former state Senate candidate Julie Perry, who received 20.33% of the vote, national security and economics professional Anthony Suttles (5.54%) and retired U.S. Army Lt. Col. Sam Wong (1.63%). Subramanyam was unopposed for the Democratic nomination. 

The winners of Tuesday’s primary contest will go head-to-head in the midterm elections, set for Nov. 3.

Additional candidates who faced no primary opposition also secured their party’s nomination Tuesday, completing the lineup for Virginia’s remaining congressional races. 

Democratic U.S. Rep. Bobby Scott of Newport News will face Republican Ed Rivera in the 3rd District. Scott, the dean of Virginia’s congressional delegation, has represented the Hampton Roads-based seat since 1993. 

No Republican filed to challenge U.S. Rep. Jennifer McClellan, D-Richmond, in the heavily Democratic-leaning 4th District. McClellan has held the seat since winning a 2023 special election.

Republican U.S. Rep. Ben Cline of Botetourt County will take on Democrat Beth Macy in the 6th District, while U.S. Rep. James Walkinshaw, D-Fairfax, will face Republican Arthur Purves in the 11th. 

• “As $43 million for Southwest flood relief remains unspent, residents who can’t afford to fix their homes wait for help.” — Cardinal News

• “Former Virginia Sen. Janet Howell, trailblazing Reston lawmaker, dies at 82.” — Patch.com

• “AP Decision Notes: What to expect in Virginia’s state primary.” — The Associated Press

• “A couple of Northern Virginia localities are doing away with gas-powered leaf blowers.” — WVTF

• “$2 million Powerball ticket sold in Virginia.” — WTVR

Virginia’s sales tax holiday begins on Friday and runs through Sunday, offering deals on qualifying school supplies, clothing and footwear sales tax. Certain emergency preparedness items also qualify.

The sales tax holiday starts Aug. 7 at 12:01 a.m. and ends Aug. 9 at 11:59 p.m., and could save consumers 5.3% to 7% on total costs. The Virginia Department of Taxation provides lists of items that qualify as sales tax-free during the holiday.

What items are eligible?

Qualified school supplies – $20 or less per item

Qualified clothing and footwear – $100 or less per item

Hurricane and emergency preparedness products

Portable generators – $1,000 or less per item

Gas-powered chainsaws – $350 or less per item

Chainsaw accessories – $60 or less per item

Other specified hurricane preparedness items – $60 or less per item

Energy Star  and WaterSense products

Qualifying Energy Star or WaterSense products purchased for noncommercial home or personal use – $2,500 or less per item 

Consumers nationwide spend an average of $293 on electronics, $250 on clothing and accessories, $174 on shoes and $146 on school supplies to prepare for their children to head back to class, according to a recent study by the National Retail Federation.

Among the many environmental, energy and economic concerns about the unconstrained spread of data centers in Virginia, the impact on drinking water supplies has ranked fairly low. That changed suddenly last week, with the release of a report that the administration of Gov. Abigail Spanberger seems to have tried to suppress.   

In compliance with legislation passed in March of 2024, scientists at the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) studied the health of the largest aquifer in eastern Virginia. Their report concludes that the Potomac Aquifer can’t support any new industrial water withdrawals. That means no water-cooled data centers. 

Virginia senators request special session to act on ’deeply alarming’ groundwater report

The implications for data center developers are obviously bad. But for the governor, the consequences may be worse. The administration delayed releasing the report for six months beyond its January 1st deadline. In fact, it took an open records request from the Associated Press to pry the report out of Spanberger’s office. 

Spanberger wasn’t even in office on January 1, so outgoing Gov. Glen Youngkin and his DEQ director, Mike Rollband, bear responsibility for at least the initial delay. 

However, Spanberger retained Rollband to continue serving during her administration. And in the months since she took office, Spanberger, like Youngkin before her, has sided with the data center industry much more often than with its critics. 

Rollband himself has not commented on the delay. The Associated Press said a Spanberger spokesman “attributed delays in the report’s release to a backlog of outstanding items from the previous governor’s administration.” 

The delay matters. If the report had been released by its January deadline, it might have influenced the General Assembly’s consideration of bills this year aimed at protecting Virginia’s water resources from the unchecked growth of the data center industry, or even spurred tougher measures. 

The General Assembly passed legislation to require reporting on how much water data centers are using, but the House bill originally required disclosure upfront as part of the permitting process. Those tougher measures never made it into the final bill. 

If legislators had had the benefit of DEQ’s report in January, would they have settled for merely collecting data after the fact? 

Sens. Russet Perry, D-Loudoun, and Richard Stuart, R-KIng George, think not. On Thursday the two legislators sent Spanberger a letter asking her to convene a special session to consider new policies to rein in water use in the aquifer system. 

Yet the report’s conclusions are not actually a surprise.

It’s true that, unlike the arid West, most of Virginia has enough water most of the time to meet our needs. But this is not the case for the Virginia Coastal Plain, roughly the area east of I-95 overlying the underground Potomac Aquifer. There, heavy withdrawals of groundwater have for decades exceeded the ability of rainfall to replenish supplies. 

The depletion of the Potomac Aquifer has been a recognized problem for years among scientists and area leaders. Its consequences include sinking land, saltwater seeping into water wells in coastal areas and greater relative sea level rise that contributes to coastal flooding. 

Most seriously, groundwater depletion threatens the ability of the region to provide water to a growing population. 

The Hampton Roads region has even implemented an effort to inject treated wastewater into the aquifer to reverse (or at least limit) land subsidence. According to the DEQ report, all it would take to undermine that effort is one significant new industrial user like a gas plant or hyperscale data center – or a combination of the two.   

Underlining the seriousness of this conclusion is the fact that most of Virginia is currently  in a drought, one severe enough to warrant weekly meetings at DEQ. The agency’s online map shows that as of this writing, groundwater supplies in parts of the coastal plain have fallen to emergency levels.

The depletion of the aquifer has hindered development before. 

Back in 2019, concerns about groundwater depletion became an issue for two gas-fired power plants proposed for Charles City County, which would have relied on groundwater from the Potomac Aquifer to produce steam and provide cooling. 

At the time, DEQ proposed to grant one of the developers a temporary permit until a pipeline could be built to deliver enough river water. Following passage of the Virginia Clean Economy Act (VCEA), however, the gas plant proposals were scrapped. 

Today, however, developers are proposing a new gas plant in Charles City to provide a data center with onsite generation. 

Developer Point One seems to think it has figured out a way around the VCEA’s limits on new fossil fuel generation by using 35 smaller gas turbines instead of a couple of big ones, and using the electricity to supply the data center directly instead of feeding energy into the grid. Whether it has discussed its water needs with DEQ is not clear. 

Polling in Virginia shows public opinion has turned sharply against data centers. Spanberger’s own popularity has also turned negative, and that might be due in part to her support for the data center industry. 

A poll released in July by the L. Douglas Wilder School of Government and Public Affairs at Virginia Commonwealth University showed 72% of residents oppose the sales tax exemption for data centers that Spanberger fought to preserve.  

Although Republican legislators in Virginia have historically supported the data center industry in larger numbers than Democrats, they may be seeing a political opportunity. Republican Sen. Glen Sturtevant, R-Chesterfield, sent a letter asking Spanberger for a “pause” on new data center approvals, citing the General Assembly’s failure to pass legislation he introduced to require site assessments. 

That puts Sturtevant on the same side as environmental groups like the Sierra Club that now see a temporary moratorium as the only way to slow the onslaught. Virginia Sierra Club data center chair Ann Bennett told me that while the DEQ report clearly makes the case against siting data centers east of I-95, “we need to protect all state waters.” 

With pressure from both the left and the right, Spanberger has the difficult job of balancing her support for data center development with her promises to protect the environment and make data centers “pay their fair share.” Her delay in releasing the DEQ report undermines her credibility at a crucial time.

By Yiqing Wang/WHRO

Cardiovascular care has become more advanced over the past two decades, giving doctors new ways to prevent deaths from heart attacks, strokes and other conditions.

But a new national study found those advances have come with rapidly rising costs while improvements in cardiovascular death rates have largely stalled.

The analysis, published in the Journal of the American College of Cardiology, found U.S. spending on cardiovascular disease more than tripled between 2000 and 2022, reaching more than $220 billion annually.

Death rates declined sharply during the first decade of the study. But they changed little after 2011.

The same trends are visible in Hampton Roads.

Virginia Department of Health data shows more than 3,100 people died from cardiovascular disease across Hampton, Newport News, Norfolk, Portsmouth and Virginia Beach in 2024.

Virginia Beach recorded the most deaths overall, with nearly 1,200. Portsmouth had the highest death rate among the five cities, at about 346 deaths per 100,000 residents, or roughly one death for every 250 residents.

The burden was not evenly distributed. Black residents had higher age-adjusted cardiovascular death rates than white residents across the region, with the widest gap in Norfolk, where the average rate was about 36% higher from 2022 to 2024.

Dr. Keith Newby, cardiology director for Bon Secours Medical Group, said factors outside the hospital have a greater influence on the disparities.

He pointed to limited access to doctors, nutritious food and safe places to exercise in Black communities, along with higher rates of hypertension, diabetes, obesity and high cholesterol.

“How do we prevent things so we don’t have to spend more? That’s where lifestyle part comes in,” Newby said.

Many of the conditions that eventually cause heart attacks, strokes and heart failure do not produce noticeable symptoms early on, he said. People can have dangerously high blood pressure or blood sugar without feeling sick.

That makes it more difficult to persuade patients to take medication, change their diets or seek regular care before serious damage occurs.

“Most people are not going to address things while they feel well,” Newby said. “They’re going to wait until they’re having a problem.”

By then, patients may need emergency treatment, hospitalization or expensive procedures.

Newby said medical advances have allowed doctors to save more people who suffer heart attacks or strokes. Doctors can also replace damaged heart valves and open blocked arteries in ways that were not widely available decades ago.

Those treatments can help people live longer, but they also add to healthcare spending.

Newby said improving cardiovascular outcomes will require cooperation among healthcare providers, schools and government agencies to expand screenings, nutrition education and access to healthier food and physical activity.

Adith Arun, one of the authors of the national study, said the overall trend raises questions about whether resources are being directed toward the most effective strategies.

“Mortality rates have plateaued for cardiovascular disease,” Arun said. “Yet we continue to spend more and more money, and the question is, ‘how can we do better?’”

Arun said health systems need to reach patients earlier, before risk factors such as high blood pressure develop into serious disease. That means better screening, proven treatments and easier access to regular care.

WASHINGTON — U.S. acting Attorney General Todd Blanche was one step closer to permanently leading the Justice Department Tuesday, after two skeptical Senate Judiciary Committee Republicans voted to advance his nomination given Blanche’s signed promise that President Donald Trump’s nearly $1.8 billion “anti-weaponization” fund is dead.

Republican Sens. John Cornyn of Texas and Thom Tillis of North Carolina, who had been withholding support for Blanche, voted with other members of the committee along party lines, 12-10, to send Blanche’s nomination to the full Senate. It is unclear how soon the Senate will vote on the confirmation.

Blanche, Trump’s former criminal defense lawyer, issued a brief signed statement on social media Sunday night promising the fund is “rescinded,” and an attached unsigned memo stated the tax immunity deal for Trump, his sons and the Trump Organization only applies “retroactively.” 

Trump did not sign the documents, and the president has defended the fund in recent days.

Cornyn said ahead of the vote Tuesday he and Tillis came to an agreement with Justice Department officials on an “agency interpretive guidance document that reaffirms what Mr. Blanche said in his sworn testimony” that the tax audit immunity is limited to the parties and subject matter in Trump’s $10 billion lawsuit against his administration’s own IRS.

Trump voluntarily dropped the lawsuit in May in exchange for tax enforcement immunity for him, his sons Eric and Don Jr., and the Trump Organization, as well as the creation of a $1.776 billion “anti-weaponization” fund that could potentially pay out to violent, but now pardoned, Jan. 6 rioters who assaulted police.

“Given this agreement with Mr. Blanche, I expect the department to live up to this in future litigation, and I will vote to advance him out of the committee today,” Cornyn said at the opening of Tuesday’s meeting.

Tillis said the question over the “payout pot for punks” was settled.

“I’ve never liked this 1776 fund. It made no sense to me, and I thought it was an insult to the police officers and the people that defended us on January the 6th. It’s done, it’s been rescinded, and I am satisfied,” Tillis said.

Tillis argued “both (sides) have a problem” and he hopes Blanche will attempt “a bending of the curve of this absurdity.”

“If you want to talk about weaponization, take a look at the Biden administration … Maybe it’s a little bit more intense in this administration than the last one, and that a little bit more intense than the prior administration, and so on and so forth. But folks, we’ve got to end this stuff,” he said.

He added the “bonehead” DOJ official in North Carolina who is prosecuting former FBI Director James Comey for a social media post of seashells on a beach spelling out “8647” — a nod to a restaurant kitchen term to get rid of something — “better damn sure have information to back it up because if all it is is a picture, that person should lose his or her job.” 

Dems united in opposition

All committee Democrats followed ranking member Dick Durbin of Illinois in delivering remarks opposing Blanche’s nomination. 

The panel’s minority members hammered concerns about Blanche’s handling of the Epstein files and meeting with convicted sex trafficker Ghislaine Maxwell, federal lawsuits for states’ voter records and a promise to faith leaders that the DOJ will make the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn federal abortion protections “permanent in every single state.”

A Department of Justice spokesperson told States Newsroom Tuesday Blanche’s comments have been “mischaracterized and need to be understood in their full context, which was with respect to mail order abortion drugs, not a broader expansion of federal control over states.”

On the criticism of DOJ’s legal intervention to obtain state voter records, the spokesperson said the department “will continue to fight for the integrity of American elections. Ensuring that only eligible citizens vote is a core function of government, and states have an obligation to maintain accurate voter rolls. Where states refuse to comply with lawful requests for voter data, DOJ will pursue every legal avenue available.”

Sen. Cory Booker of New Jersey chastised his Republican counterparts for comparing the Trump administration’s actions to the Biden administration, including President Joe Biden’s pardons of his son Hunter and other officials just hours before leaving office.

“That is like being obsessed and using a magnifying glass to study the stain on the living room carpet when behind you is a mountain of excrement covering the living room couch and coffee table,” Booker said. 

He added that Trump’s recent financial disclosure revealed he made nearly $2 billion in crypto and foreign investments, and pointed to his sons’ Eric and Don Jr.’s backing of defense tech business ventures.

“The lack of proportionality going on (by) my colleagues, it is laughable,” he said.

Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse described Blanche’s two-paragraph signed statement and unsigned memo in response to Cornyn and Tillis’ concerns as “decorative.”

The Rhode Island Democrat said the Trump administration could reverse course and create a similar fund.

“Nothing in this document prevents anything like that from happening,” Whitehouse said.

A Department of Justice spokesperson said Whitehouse’s claim is “untrue” and said the department “has released all responsive documents required by the Epstein Files Transparency Act.” 

“The Department erred on the side of over-collecting from its components to ensure collection of everything necessary under the Act, resulting in over six million pages collected, almost three million of which are responsive and have been produced. The remaining items were non-responsive, meaning entirely unrelated, privileged, or duplicative. This administration has been more transparent on the Epstein matter than any past administration, including the Biden administration,” the spokesperson said in a written response to States Newsroom.

Durbin accused Blanche of lying under oath when he denied during his confirmation hearing a comment he made about the “anti-weaponization” fund during a pre-hearing meeting with Durbin.

“Mr. Blanche told me he made, quote, ‘a mistake,’ end quote, by creating the January 6th slush fund. Where did he say it? In my office, with witnesses on my staff to what I’m about to say. When I asked him about this under oath, Mr. Blanche falsely claimed that he never made this statement,” Durbin said.

A department spokesperson told States Newsroom in a statement that the senator’s accusation is “false and he knows it.”

“The Acting AG signed an order on August 2nd that rescinds the May 18th Order establishing an Anti-Weaponization Fund. He restated and incorporated testimony he gave under oath that the May 19th Order has effect only on plaintiffs and defendants, and that the release is retroactive only. As Acting AG Blanche said at the hearing, the fund is dead. This has been relayed before the House and Senate under oath and in multiple court filings,” according to the spokesperson.

Sen. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., slammed Trump for suing the Internal Revenue Service in the first place. The contractor who leaked Trump and his sons’ and organization’s tax information to reporters in 2019 was sentenced for the crime in 2024.

“He waits til he’s president. He sues the IRS for $10 billion. In a stunning act of self-dealing, he purports to settle with himself. He’s represented by his personal lawyers on the one hand, and by his other lawyers at the Department of Justice on the other hand,” Schiff said, highlighting the Florida federal judge’s order that Trump used his presidency to “manipulate” the court for his benefit. 

“Now there was an effort, and I appreciate my colleagues from Texas and North Carolina making an effort to try to rein in this tax settlement. But what they attempted to achieve has not been achieved,” Schiff said.

Epstein survivors disappointed

Blanche’s nomination vote drew criticism from outside the committee as well.

In an open letter Tuesday, 18 survivors of abuse by the now deceased sex offender Jeffrey Epstein and convicted sex trafficker Maxwell called the vote “a profound disappointment.”

Survivors have slammed Blanche’s handling of the Epstein files release, which unmasked several survivors’ names and images in the process “while he concealed the identities of alleged abusers and others connected to Epstein’s trafficking network,” the letter stated.

“When we met with Blanche (after his confirmation hearing), he interrupted us. He told us to ‘get to the point.’ He told us to report what happened to us to the FBI. We already have. Some of us have been reporting these crimes for decades,” the survivors wrote.

In another line of criticism, the legal advocacy organization Democracy Forward said in a letter to the Justice Department Monday that Blanche has refused to provide a sworn statement in federal court that the “anti-weaponization” fund will not accept and pay out claims.

Democracy Forward is representing several plaintiffs in a lawsuit over the fund, including a former federal prosecutor who alleges he was fired in June 2025 for his involvement in Jan. 6 prosecutions.

“The American people are not fooled by this latest move, and neither are we. The Trump-Vance administration cannot ask the public or our clients to accept a late-night social media post in place of legally binding action,” said Skye Perryman, president and CEO of Democracy Forward in a statement Monday.

WASHINGTON — States do not have time before November’s midterm elections to comply with President Donald Trump’s executive order mandating overhauls of their mail-in-voting systems, two dozen Democratic state officials told the U.S. Supreme Court on Monday.

Justices should keep a stay pausing the order in place through Election Day, the Democrats, led by California Attorney General Rob Bonta, wrote. The court is compelled to keep voting rules in place this close to an election, but the executive order would force massive changes on state administrators, they wrote.

Neither the president nor the U.S. Postal Service has authority to administer elections under the U.S. Constitution, which assigns that responsibility to state governments, the Democrats wrote. 

Trump’s March 31 order directs USPS to collect lists of registered voters from each state and only mail ballots to registered voters, and the Department of Homeland Security to compile lists of voting-age citizens in each state. 

That would insert the executive branch directly into elections administration and the administration has not defended the legality of that move, the Democrats wrote.

Worse, the officials said, the order would create mass confusion at this point in the election cycle, meaning that the court should delay considering whether it is legal until after the midterms.

“Because of the high risk of errors and the limited window for correcting mistakes, many of the millions of voters who rely on mail voting—especially voters with disabilities and those in rural areas—would likely be denied mail ballots and, as a result, disenfranchised,” the state officials said. “Many more voters would be confused—either because they wouldn’t receive their mail ballots or would fear that USPS would fail to deliver their voted ballots to state officials for tabulation.”

Bonta signed the brief along with the attorneys general of Massachusetts, Washington, Nevada, Arizona, Connecticut, Colorado, the District of Columbia, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia and Wisconsin. Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro also signed on.

Their filing was the Democrats’ response to the Justice Department request that the Supreme Court overturn an appeals court decision against lifting a district court stay of the executive order. The court is considering the issue on its emergency docket that allows for speedy decisions.

Spokespeople for the Justice Department did not return a message seeking comment Monday.

No final rule 

The administration argued that the states’ challenge was premature because the Postal Service and DHS had not yet written the rules the executive order directed.

While a three-judge panel of the U.S. 1st Circuit Court of Appeals sided with the Democratic states, a separate case at the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals agreed with the administration that the states could not yet challenge the policy because there was no final rule. The case under consideration at the Supreme Court is from the 1st Circuit.

In an amicus brief supporting the federal government, a coalition of conservative groups led by attorney William Olson said Monday that the district court stay was possibly the first time a judge has blocked a notice of proposed rulemaking, which “is the very definition of an agency action which is not a final agency action.”

Sowing voter confusion

The states said Monday the order itself, even without final rules from the affected agencies, would impose significant burdens on their election administrators. And the administration has detailed in court the steps the agencies must take to finalize the order’s mandates.

Forcing the states to wait until there is an actual rule in place, especially when the steps agencies have taken “do not materially differ” from the order, would mean state election officials could face an untenable situation of needing to prepare for the new requirements.

“If litigation challenging final implementation of the EO does not even begin for several more weeks, it would be extremely difficult—if not impossible—to obtain a definitive judicial resolution with enough time remaining for States to redesign and reorder their ballot mail, train elections officials, and adequately educate the public before the November midterms,” the state officials wrote.

That would drain significant resources from overworked election offices at a busy campaign time, and leave voters “confused about which rules govern,” they added.

Support for states

Several friend-of-the-court briefs weighed in on the states’ side. 

Scores of state and local election officials and the nonprofit voting rights group Center for Election Innovation wrote in one amicus brief that if the executive order is allowed to proceed, it would put them in the “untenable position” of updating their mail-voting procedures in the midst of primaries and just weeks before a general election.

And Democratic campaign groups said the order was plainly unconstitutional and rejected the administration’s argument, saying it “makes little sense.” 

In part, the administration argued the district court injunction caused irreparable harm because the administration was running out of time to implement the policy before the midterms, attorney Marc Elias wrote for the Democratic National Committee, three campaign groups and the Democratic leaders of each chamber of Congress.

“When the President launches an unconstitutional seizure of sensitive election powers during an election year, he may not avoid an injunction by insisting he is in a rush,” Elias wrote.

WASHINGTON — Leaders of the U.S. Senate Appropriations Committee announced a bipartisan deal over the weekend that would keep the federal government funded through Dec. 11 and pause the Trump administration’s effort to add controversial new criteria for federal grants.

The agreement — which Senate Appropriations Chair Susan Collins, a Maine Republican, and Vice Chair Patty Murray, a Democrat from Washington state, released Sunday — would avoid an Oct. 1 government shutdown and keep federal spending at current levels, punting debates about full-year spending past the midterm elections. It would also extend authorization for the federal fund for highway and transit.

The Senate bill differs considerably from the more partisan stopgap spending measure the House passed last month, with Republicans providing nearly all the votes in support.

The Senate was scheduled to take a procedural vote Monday evening to advance the bill and, if that attracts more than 60 yes votes, would likely consider final passage this week.

In a statement, Collins said she worked with committee members of both parties and that the measure, known as a continuing resolution, or CR, excludes provisions that would doom its chances in the consensus-driven Senate.

“This CR is straightforward,” Collins wrote. “It continues current government funding levels until December 11th and includes necessary adjustments for programs like the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC), vital national security programs, including shipbuilding across multiple vessels, and the Disaster Relief Fund. The CR also avoids any poison pills.”

Murray championed Democrats’ success in blocking provisions of the House bill that would increase spending for military action in Iran and allow transfers for immigration enforcement, while adding sections to extend housing and food assistance programs and a section blocking the proposed rule on grant funding.

“This bill includes important extensions and language that House Republicans’ CR did not, and it rejects Trump’s frivolous war spending wish list,” Murray wrote. “Importantly, we closed the loophole in House Republicans’ CR that would have allowed the Trump administration to transfer funding provided for other programs to Border Patrol, which desperately needs reform, not more money.”

The Senate bill would keep nearly all federal spending steady until Dec. 11, which would save lawmakers from the painstaking work of cobbling together the 12 annual spending bills — and taking potentially difficult votes on them — while freeing more time to campaign ahead of the November elections.

OMB proposal paused

It would also freeze until Dec. 11 the White House Office of Management and Budget’s proposed rule that Democrats have criticized for giving immense decisionmaking power to executive branch political appointees who would be empowered to confirm that federal grants align with the administration’s policy priorities.

House Appropriations ranking Democrat Rosa DeLauro said she was pleased to see the Senate bill block the rule from taking effect into December, but wanted a more permanent ban.

“While the bill temporarily blocks the proposed OMB rule, the fight must continue,” she wrote Sunday. “The Senate bill forces OMB to continue reviewing the half-million comments that were submitted, but Congress must permanently prevent this corrupt, harmful power grab before the new deadline of December 11.”

A draft of the rule, posted May 29, said the policy aims to downplay criteria based on diversity, equity and inclusion goals “and make merit-based decisions.”

Some Democrats, including those in Maryland’s congressional delegation, criticized the policy, saying it would create “arbitrary standards that are ripe for abuse” and “seeks to prohibit freedom of association, speech, and … international collaboration.”

More broadly, Democrats and some moderate Republicans objected to the power the rule would centralize in OMB and other executive agencies. 

“The proposed rule would systematically politicize federal funding and allow Trump officials to cancel grants at any time for any reason,” Murray wrote. “Enabling this rule would only give Trump the greenlight to take even more federal funding hostage.”

In a July letter to OMB Director Russ Vought, Collins said she agreed with the principles of awarding grants based on merit, but that the rule would add a level of bureaucracy to grants that have already been approved by the scientific community and weaken Congress’ power over spending decisions.

“While I agree these principles should guide the administration and oversight of Federal funds, the rule would impose new, burdensome requirements on award recipients that would harm small and rural communities, undermine scientific and biomedical research, and conflict with Congress’ control over the federal funding process,” Collins wrote.

Road funding extended

The stopgap measure would also extend the major federal transportation trust fund through the duration of the bill.

The Highway Trust Fund sends set funding to state departments of transportation and local authorities to finance road and transit infrastructure. 

Its authority to collect revenue, mostly through the federal gas tax, and send it to states is set to expire at the end of the fiscal year on Sept. 30. The continuing resolution would keep in place the contract authority level, about $80.2 billion per year, Congress approved in a 2021 law.

It would not, however, include the “advance appropriations” from the 2021 law that provided additional funding to several Transportation Department programs that disperse money to states and local governments.

Murray said she sought to have the $36.8 billion annual program extended, but was rebuffed by committee Republicans.

White House spokespeople did not immediately return a message seeking comment Monday.

States will have to meet a Jan. 1 deadline to implement new Medicaid work requirements, after a federal judge denied 25 Democratic-led states’ request to pause implementation of the rule.

The broad tax and spending law President Donald Trump signed last summer, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, requires states that have expanded Medicaid to cover more adults under the Affordable Care Act — 42  states plus the District of Columbia — to mandate that those adults work, go to school or volunteer for at least 80 hours a month to keep their coverage.

On June 29, the Democratic-led states sued the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), taking aim at new federal guidance, published earlier that month, that narrows the definition of who can qualify as “medically frail.” That designation excuses Medicaid recipients from work requirements if they have serious disabilities or illnesses.

The plaintiffs argued that the new exemption is too narrow, and would force patients with severe illnesses and disabilities to “jump through unnecessary administrative hoops” to keep their coverage. They also asserted that implementation would be costly and time-consuming, and noted that the new guidance came months after they’d already begun consulting with the federal government on how to implement the work requirements.

But United States District Judge Richard Stearns of Massachusetts noted in a ruling issued on Wednesday that CMS has said it will reimburse states for 90% of the costs associated with designing and executing the requirements. Stearns said he wasn’t convinced that states would be unable to cover the remaining 10%, and pointed out that the Jan. 1 deadline was set by Congress, not CMS.

“Because injunctive relief is the exception, not the rule, there is a certain point at which damages fail to justify the issuance of such an extraordinary measure,” he wrote. “Plaintiffs have not shown that their damages rise above that minimal threshold here. Moreover, the additional costs that may be incurred by the States are unlikely to bloom disproportionately given the familiarity of the responsible state agencies with the tasks to be performed.”

The court acknowledged that the case presents “difficult issues” about the scope of what Congress delegated to HHS. It also raises questions about CMS Administrator Dr. Mehmet Oz’s “faithfulness to Congressional intent,” the judge wrote.

Between 3 and 7 million people could lose coverage as a result of the new work requirements, the Urban Institute estimated earlier this year. With the addition of more frequent eligibility checks, up to 10 million people could lose coverage over the next decade.

Along with the governors of Kentucky and Pennsylvania, the complaint was brought by Democratic attorneys general of Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, Washington and Wisconsin.

Stateline reporter Nada Hassanein can be reached at [email protected].

• “Democrats’ big Virginia plans were foiled, but it’s still at the center of the battle for the House.” — NBC News

• “As Trump promotes critical mineral mining, a company eyes the seafloor in Coastal Virginia.” — Inside Climate News

• “Former Va. House candidate sentenced in $225,000 pandemic relief fraud scheme.” — WRIC

• “College will cost more in Virginia this fall. Here’s an idea of what you’re paying for.” — The Virginian-Pilot

• “Marine injured in Afghanistan receives custom Virginia home with 40 ADA adaptations.” — WTVR