Will the House of Representatives fight for a fair election?

The House of Representatives called it quits Wednesday. Congress was supposed to be in session until August 1, but representatives ran out of things to do. Or rather, they ran out of things they believed they could get done.

Spending negotiations had slowed and stumbled into vote-trading between conservatives and moderates, slowly grinding to a halt. Anything the Senate was working on could be handled in the fall. And after all, D.C. is very hot right now.

After weeks of Democratic depression, both sides suddenly think they can win in November — and neither camp wants to own an unpopular shutdown.

But a vacation from the capital isn’t a vacation from reality, and when they return on September 9, they’ll have to figure out how to fund the government by the end of that month, either for the short term, with a continuing resolution, or for the longer term with a massive omnibus. Conservatives have been fighting hard against the second option — but might be willing to risk its possibility if they can get something in return.

Looming over the coming battle is the SAVE Act, a bill that would establish safeguards against noncitizens voting in American elections, sponsored by Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas) and Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah). Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) fought loudly for it earlier this month and was able to pass it with the support of five vulnerable Democrats despite the White House’s condemnation.

Then, the Senate ignored it.

Congressional Republicans aren’t alone in calling for its passage before the November election. Former President Donald Trump has been a vocal proponent of the SAVE Act, and after Lee used an interview with “Blaze New Tonight” to call for it to be attached to the next must-pass legislation, Trump endorsed that strategy.

How to END Democrat Push for Illegal Immigrant Voting | Guest Sen. Mike Leewww.youtube.com

Conservatives, meanwhile, spent the past few weeks calling for the House to get itself in order to prepare for a no-strings, no-spending-increases CR to last until February or March, when they hope a Trump administration will be able take the lead on negotiations, hammering out its own agenda for 2025.

Now, some are willing to back off that request and accept a CR until December — that is, if leadership is willing to fight Democrats over the SAVE Act. With illegal immigration as unpopular as it is (and as important an issue as it is) across the country, they hope Democrats will be loath to fight a shutdown battle on the issue, and this way they could force the Senate’s hand before the November election.

It’s a gamble, one that Republican leadership members have been squeamish over. They’re afraid Democrats’ media friends will lay the blame on Republicans no matter the facts. But illegal immigration is a big deal, and leadership is very politically minded. Right now, the nominee, the base, and the donors all want it. That’s a potent combination.

But never underestimate D.C.’s ability to blame someone else. In this case, you can guess that Johnson and his team will claim it’s the Senate’s fault they can’t fight hard. They’re reluctant to even threaten the Democratic Senate. The best avenue for his colleagues on the right to force his hand might be making his re-election to leadership contingent on this negotiation tactic.

It’s a strange moment in the election. After weeks of Democratic depression, both sides suddenly think they can win in November — and neither camp wants to own an unpopular shutdown. This sort of thinking can be helpful to agreeing to renegotiate spending in December, when both sides think they’ll have the upper hand after they win the White House and all those seats. This might be helpful in forcing Democrats to pass the SAVE Act to avoid that shutdown and protect American elections at a time when far too few have faith in the system.

A lot will come down to whether Trump sticks with his calls to pass the SAVE Act this way and force Johnson’s hand. Will he? Or will the threat of a shutdown shake his determination? It might just depend on who’s speaking loudest in his ear this summer.

Sign up for Bedford’s newsletter
Sign up to get Blaze Media senior politics editor Christopher Bedford's newsletter.

Tthe fire rises: City Journal: Tech titans for Trump

Elon Musk and Peter Thiel aren't alone. Technologists and founders and funders like David Sacks, Ben Horowitz, and Marc Andreessen are also flirting with (or outright backing) Republicans. So what’s going on in Silicon Valley? Jon Askonas and Robert Bellafiore Jr. report:

The tech industry, after all, has never exactly been a bastion of conservatism. In recent decades, its political stance has generally ranged from solidly Democratic to an apolitical libertarianism that sought to circumvent the government altogether. Republican megadonor and Vance mentor Peter Thiel, of PayPal and Palantir, has long been the exception proving the rule of tech’s alignment with liberalism. Not anymore. The nascent “tech bros for Trump” movement demands an explanation …

… Something [beyond self-interest], more inchoate, explains the tech turn beyond retail politics or recent events. When Solana identified the beginnings of a “vibe shift” in February 2023, he had his finger on a deeper cultural pulse: a rising desire to cast off timidity and compliance in the name of freedom.

This points to a final reason for tech’s move rightward: the Right has become the more dynamic political camp. When Trump stated in his RNC acceptance speech, “Ambition is our heritage. Greatness is our birthright,” many in the tech industry nodded along. In a similar vein, Mark Zuckerberg could praise Trump’s response to being shot as “one of the most badass things I’ve ever seen in my life.” Trump and the rise of the “New Right” have made it possible to rethink old ideas, propose crazy new ones, and offer bold, ambitious plans for revitalizing America. These plans, coalescing around an America First pursuit of the national interest, align well with an industry full of entrepreneurs and builders eager to accomplish something unprecedented, if only to prove that it’s possible …