THE LOOK AHEAD – December 2025

Produced By:

Bret Manley (bret@elevatega.com) and David Marten (david@elevatega.com)
Elevate Government Affairs (www.elevatega.com)

Balance of Power

Senate: 53 Republicans, 45 Democrats, 2 Independents Caucusing with Democrats

House: 219 Republicans, 213 Democrats, 3 Vacancies

  • TX-18: Harris County Attorney Christian Menefee and former Houston City Council member Amanda Edwards will head to a runoff after no candidate secured 50% of the vote in the November 4th special election. Gov. Greg Abbott (R-TX) set January 31st, 2026 as the date for the runoff election. Rep. Sylvester Turner (D-TX) passed away on March 5th after just arriving in Congress to fill the seat long held by former Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee until she passed away last year. This is a safe Democratic seat.
  • TN-07: Rep. Mark Green (R-TN), formerly the Chairman of the House Committee on Homeland Security, abruptly resigned from Congress on July 20th. The general election is tomorrow, December 2nd. This is a safe Republican seat (though Democrats are making waves that this could be close).
  • NJ-11: Rep. Mikie Sherrill (D-NJ) resigned November 20th in advance of her swearing in as New Jersey’s next Governor in January. The primary to fill the seat will be February 5th and the special election will be held April 16th. This is a safe Democratic seat.

Top Line Takeaways

  • Redistricting: You might have missed it, but we didn’t! The Supreme Court temporarily restored the new Texas map after much media hay was made about it being struck down. So what you say? Well, SCOTUS is hearing a challenge in Louisiana v. Callais, which tossed Louisiana’s congressional maps claiming it violated Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act by not drawing two districts with a majority Black voting population. A SCOTUS decision on this case is expected in December, and if Section 2 is ruled unconstitutional on the basis that it violates the equal protection clause of the Constitution, then the “temporary” Texas map becomes permanent. Note: Texas filing deadline is December 16th. If they act early enough, a few other states may move to adjust their maps as well. Notably (and this is on purpose), CA Republicans sued over their state’s redistricting effort on the same grounds, that it violated Section 2, but because they were trying to boost the case to toss Section 2 of VRA. This is a very long way of saying the most likely outcome here is both the California and Texas redraws will be the maps heading into 2026.
  • NDAA is on Track?:  We were supposed to see legislative text of the negotiated NDAA before the Thanksgiving holiday. We are going to say the shutdown delays are the reason we didn’t, not that there is anything holding up the final agreement. Since the bill’s inception, Congress has passed an NDAA by year’s end in a bipartisan manner every year. We aren’t going to see an end to that streak, even with this group. Currently issues over AI and export controls are holding up the package.
  • Coast Guard: Speaking of NDAA, one big question mark is if the Coast Guard reauthorization will ride along with it. The biggest potential policy change, includied in the House version of the bill, was the creation of the Secretary of the Coast Guard. We are told that this is out. What we hear is that there is insufficient support in the four corners, exacerbated by frustrations members on both sides have with DHS, and an unwillingness (or lack of interest) from the White House on leaning in on a proposal they made as part of their force realignment strategy. The possibility remains that the Coast Guard reauthorization might be left out in the cold for a second straight year.
  • Member Security Funding: The much-anticipated memo from the House Sergeant at Arms (come on we know you were on pins and needles) on how the new pot of money for member security can be spent is out. You can find it here. We are in a bad place in our history that this type of thing, to the tune of $20,000 a month(!), is necessary for members of Congress to safely attend a potluck at the local American Legion to discuss their important work exposing the truth of Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena (ahem…aliens). We probably aren’t too far out in front of our skis either to point out we’re probably six months away from the next relative getting a raise for their security “expertise.” To answer your burning question…no this does not apply to the Senate. Why? Because each chamber sets its own rules for expenditures and security. It’s called efficiency.

On Deck – House and Senate Rumblings

Online Safety and Privacy: The long-awaited House Energy and Commerce response to the Senate’s efforts on Kids online safety (KOSA) has been set for this week. And…it’s a subcommittee legislative hearing. In terms of committing to action, this is one step above a subcommittee informational/oversight hearing. There are still an innumerable amount of issues the House has yet to resolve, primary among them duty of care, private right of action, and a core belief that some of these efforts violate constitutionally protected activity. We know the Senate bill is DOA in the House. Announcing a legislative hearing on 19 different bills is the type of thing you do when you want to nod at what the Senate did or what the media is clamoring for, without actually doing it. If E&C were committed to a comprehensive bill, they wouldn’t allow that effort to share the stage with 18 other bills. Expect this to be followed up in the new year with a smaller pairing of children online safety legislation and a commitment to continue working on the issue. We expect COPPA 2.0 and something related to age verification. The Senate is in sit and wait mode; they have no ability to jam the House on this.

He Shoots, He SCORE(s) Act: The House is moving forward with its legislation to “codify” the rights of college athletes to enter into Name, Image, and Likeness deals. College athletes already have this right in the wake of the House decision. What’s followed is a system of pay-to-play free agency that is totally untethered to an individual right of publicity, for which there is no federal standard. This fight is fundamentally about NCAA liability, and their ability to set rules and regulations without violating federal anti-trust laws. The thing to watch here is the number of Democrats who vote for the House bill. Reminder: the SCORE act explicitly prohibits college athletes from being classified as employees. We’ve been telling anyone who would listen for months that universities, traditional Democratic party stalwarts, were lobbying aggressively behind the scenes for this. Senate Democrats have already said that the SCORE Act will not pass in the Senate. A Dem-only effort led by Senator Cantwell is silent on the employee issue. We expect the Senate to counter with a bill from Chairman Cruz and Delaware Democrat Chris Coons and this will also lean against employee status. The number to look for in the House vote is 40 Democrats voting in favor. Anything more than that and it’s difficult to argue there isn’t strong bipartisan support.

NDAA: Next week or week after we will see a conference report on the NDAA pass with bipartisan majorities. How do we know? Well the House and Senate have each passed their bill and neither chamber has voted to go to conference. Wait…what? Hear us out. A vote to go to conference enables anyone in the House to come to the floor with a motion to instruct conferees. That motion is privileged but non-binding. Basically, you can get members on the record for whatever hot button issue you want. In recent Congresses, the Motion to go to conference immediately precedes a vote on the final conference agreement, to prevent these votes. If the House feels like they’re never going to get there, they motion to go to conference, and then the majority tries to dunk on the minority with a million procedural votes.

We Were Against AI Pre-Emption Before We Were For It: Leader Scalise has said he wants AI-pre-emption in the final NDAA that heads to the President’s desk. Allegedly he has a deal in place with Chairman Cruz and the White House which – in their telling at least – is why the President backed off his (mostly symbolic) executive order pre-empting state AI regulation. Reminder, the House passed a version of state pre-emption in its original version of One Big Beautiful Bill, and the Senate ultimately voted down a version 99-1. That’s a lot of no votes to overcome in a bill that’s always bipartisan. Color us skeptical. Left unmentioned is the significant bi-partisan opposition from states’ Attorneys General. Couple of AGs on that letter stick out…Louisiana and Mississippi…home to the House Speaker/Majority Leader and the Chairman of Senate Armed Services respectively.

Appropriations Schmappropriations: After initial optimism over two more mini-bus agreements to fund the government, we’ve hit a bit of a snag. Senate Republicans released two bills (Energy-Water and Financial Services) Democrats are calling partisan. Whether they are or not isn’t the point, they released a bill without the minority’s agreement which means there’s significant disagreement over something. If there’s no agreement by the 12th, chatter of another shutdown is going to increase. House Republicans are waiting for the Senate to send over something. We’ve heard two competing packages, the bigger of the two would see Defense, Labor-HHS, THUD, and CJS. We’ve also heard Defense and Labor-HHS would be separate (reminder Labor-HHS always rides with Defense otherwise it’d get sunk in abortion politics).

Nomination Domination: We say this every month, but the Senate will be in full on nomination mode and expect another one of those bulk packages. Why? Well, as you’ll read below, once the Congress adjourns Sine Die for the 2nd session of the 119th Congress, Presidential nominees who haven’t been confirmed have to be resubmitted for nomination. That process takes time, and time in an election year is especially valuable. Sprinkle on top that it makes the people who nominated you wonder what the problem is. If you’re a nominee, you don’t want to wake up Christmas morning without a Senate Confirmation under the tree.

Get Smart – Why Are There Two Sessions of Congress in One Term, and Does it Matter?

Surely, you’ve wondered why a term of Congress is broken into two separate terms and wondered whether there are any practical consequences of this decision. Well, Shirley, we’re here to help!

Wait a Minute, I Thought a Congressional Session Was Two Years Long?: A term is two years long. We are in the 119th Congress. 118 Congressional terms existed before this one.

Uhhh, 119 x 2 = 238. Isn’t This “America 250”? You’re Missing Some Years!: Well, we know that you know this, but for your uh…friend…We declared Independence in 1776, but you know we had to fight a war and stuff which took some time, you know you had to walk everywhere and all that. Then we had the Articles of Confederation, which didn’t work that great, before we settled on the Constitution (ratified 1788) and first Congress convening March 4th, 1789. President Washington was sworn in almost two months later on April 30th.

Wait a Minute…There Was No President or Congress Before 1789!? Who Was In Charge!?: Ok we are getting a little distracted here but under the Articles of Confederation the presiding officer of the Continental Congress (called the President) was technically the top dog. It’d be like if the Senate, the Administration, and the Supreme Court didn’t exist, and Speaker Mike Johnson was President Mike Johnson, but all he really had the authority to do was like call meetings and stuff.

Ok Ok, We Totally Knew That. Back To the Session Thing. Why Isn’t This the 228th Congress?: So the backstory here is complicated and may or may not be the handiwork of one Benjamin Franklin, but to balance the concerns of the big states and the small states, the Constitutional Convention decided that the House, in order to reflect the will of the people (remember originally Senators were selected by the State legislatures), would face voters every two years. The “Great Compromise” as it was called…which is weird because this is what Bret says about how he and his wife ended up with a cat (he wanted a dog). Article 1, Section 2, Clause I: “The House of Representatives shall be composed of Members chosen every second Year by the People of the several States…”.

Ok Great, Each Congress is Two Years, Doesn’t Explain the Two Sessions Thing: Article 1, Section 4, Clause II: “The Congress shall assemble at least once in every Year, and such Meeting shall be on the first Monday in December, unless they shall by Law appoint a different Day.”. To get ahead of your next question, the 20th Amendment to the Constitution changed the day to January 3rd.

But They Could Just Stay In Session The Whole Time, Right?: In theory, yes. In theory, you could have 12 sessions in a term. The first Congress had three sessions. But recall that in 1789 the big “G” Government wasn’t that big. There were definitely no hearings about Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena (sad!), and there was no Amtrak. It took really really, really long to walk from Delaware to Washington, D.C.  Members preferred to be at home, amongst their constituents and states, and so they’d come to D.C. for a “session”, leave for a long time (6 months or more) and come back for another session, and leave for elections.

OK, So Why Does Any of This Matter? It all comes down to how Congress chooses to “adjourn.” There are three types of adjournment, briefly:

  • Intrasession Adjournment: Like August recess. The House and Senate do not adopt adjournment resolutions. There are “pro forma” sessions every three days.
  • Intersession Adjournment: Between the final day of the first session and January 3rd of the second session. The convening day can be changed by a joint resolution and any intersession adjournment lasting longer than 3 days must also require the other chamber’s approval.
  • Adjournment Sine Die: Terminates the Session of Congress.

Uhh…Intersession and Sine Die Sound Pretty Similar: They do, but they aren’t! Adjourning Sine Die is an intersession adjournment but an intersession adjournment is not the same as adjourning Sine Die. When you adjourn Sine Die that session of Congress is legally over. So a Congress can have an intersession adjournment on Friday, December 19th of this year, gavel in for a Pro Forma session on the 24th and adjourn Sine Die on the 31st.

Ugh, This is Getting Long; Wrap it Up, Why Does This Matter!?: The House and Senate can only adjourn for more than 3 days with the other chamber’s approval. So pretty much all Intrasession adjournments are 3 days (or less). Even in August, every three legislative days (non-weekends) they adjourn for a “Pro Forma” session. This is to prevent the President from making recess appointments (which we covered in a previous Get Smart). When you adjourn Sine Die there are legal consequences.

Ok Quick, What Are the Legal Consequences of Adjourning Sine Die?: Ok BIIIIG BREATH:

  1. All pending nominations are returned to the President unless the Senate takes unanimous-consent action to retain them.
  2. Presidential appointments (judges, administration officials, ambassadors, etc.).
  3. Pending treaties before the Senate must be reconsidered in the next session.
  4. Legislative days in both chambers reset because sine die adjournment terminates the existing legislative day. This affects things like CRAs and Discharge Petitions.
  5. Bills die if the adjournment ends a Congress (every even year).
  6. Enables presidential pocket vetoes (if ending a term or for certain length) because Congress cannot receive returned veto messages.
  7. Permits recess appointments.
  8. Certain select and joint committees dissolve.
  9. Conference committees terminate upon adjournment sine die.
  10. House rules revert at the end of a Congress until a new rules package is adopted.
  11. Vacates the Office of the Speaker (if between Congressional terms)

Reminder: Elevate Government Affairs offers monitoring and full coverage of hearings and markups for our clients. Be sure to ask us if you need something covered!

This is a product of Elevate Government Affairs LLC. To learn more about our firm, visit elevatega.com.