Author: admin

(WASHINGTON) — The White House on Thursday is expected to present the latest plans for the East Wing renovation project, in a public meeting of the National Capital Planning Commission.

An organization established by Congress to manage Washington-area federal projects, the NCPC has an agenda item for the “East Wing Modernization Project” on the schedule for its Jan. 8 meeting, which is open to the public and will be livestreamed.

In December, the National Trust for Historic Preservation filed a lawsuit to stop the East Wing construction project by claiming the administration had circumvented the required review process for federal projects. 

In a hearing in that case, the administration told a federal judge it would submit plans for the project to the relevant federal oversight bodies.

The judge said he would hold a follow-up hearing on the White House’s process in January and declined to stop construction at the time. 

Days later, the administration submitted formal applications and plans for the renovation project to the NCPC and the Commission of Fine Arts, a White House official confirmed to ABC News at the time.

In its filing in the case brought by the historic preservation group, the Justice Department argued that without a permanent ballroom, the White House can no longer meet the needs of the president as he fulfills his constitutional duty to “receive Ambassadors and other public Ministers.”

“It is entirely fitting, then, that the presidential residence and workplace be equipped for that purpose. Given modern needs, the White House is not,” the Justice Department argued.

Even as it determined in late August that the White House ballroom would have “no significant impact” on the surrounding grounds, the National Park Service did highlight some of the adverse effects of the project, presaging concerns that have since been echoed by preservationists, architects and designers.

“The new building’s larger footprint and height will dominate the eastern portion of the site, creating a visual imbalance with the more modestly scaled West Wing and Executive Mansion,” the NPS report noted. “Adding a second story to the East Colonnade will further modify the setting, contrasting with the single-story design of the West Colonnade and changing the traditional spatial organization and sightlines of the grounds.”

Such changes, the report indicated, “will adversely alter the design, setting, and feeling of the White House and grounds over the long-term,” while the destruction of the East Wing would result in “the permanent loss of a component that has been integral to White House operations since 1942.”

Still, the “environmental assessment” — prepared by the deputy director of the park service and signed by its comptroller — concluded that the benefits of a new ballroom for state functions would outweigh the adverse effects “by reducing reliance on temporary event infrastructure, minimizing wear on the grounds, and improving functionality for large gatherings.”

The White House announced the ballroom construction project in late July, and demolition began suddenly on the East Wing in late October, when workers were spotted tearing down the wing of the White House that contained the first lady’s offices.

Trump has repeatedly increased the size and cost of the construction 90,000 square foot ballroom project. Last month, he said it would cost $400 million, after an initial estimate of $200 million. The White House has said the project will be funded by private donations.

The president has also moved to fill both advisory boards supervising the ballroom project with his own aides and appointees. 

He also spent some of his vacation working on the project: Last Friday in Florida, he visited Arc Stone & Tile, an Italian stone importer, and spent roughly an hour at the showroom before purchasing onyx and marble for the ballroom.

The White House expects to make its final presentations to the Commission of Fine Arts in February, and to the National Capitol Planning Commission in March, and will submit its final plan for the project by the end of January, a White House official told ABC News. 

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — Rep. Steny Hoyer, D-Md., the former No. 2 Democrat in the chamber who has served for decades, is set to announce his retirement from Congress, his office confirmed to ABC News.

Hoyer will formally announce his decision not to run for reelection on the House floor at 10 a.m. Thursday.

Hoyer, 86, spent two decades as Nancy Pelosi’s deputy and is set to retire as the California Democrat also prepares to leave Congress at the end of the year — amid a debate in the party about turning over leadership to a new generation.

Their relationship dates back to the 1960s when they served as congressional interns together, decades before they competed to lead Democrats.

The genteel dean of the Maryland delegation, who helped send billions of federal dollars to his state as an appropriator, was often a key negotiating partner for Republican leaders who maintained better relations with him than the hard-charging Pelosi.

Many Democrats are now turning to see if 85-year-old Jim Clyburn of South Carolina, the longtime No. 3 Democrat on the team, will follow through on plans to run for reelection next year.

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(NEW YORK) — U.S. Secretary of Education Linda McMahon granted Iowa a first-of-its-kind waiver to use millions of unrestricted federal dollars on education in a move that inches the Trump administration closer to its goal of transferring education power and decision-making to states.

“States should lead — Washington should support their sound approaches and get out of the way,” McMahon announced on Wednesday. “We hope that as we partner with congressional leaders to return education to the states we can work with them [Iowa] to expand these opportunities for states and local leaders to run their education systems.”

The over $9 million waiver will help the Hawkeye State save millions in “compliance costs” over four years as the money flows directly back into the classroom, McMahon said in a post on X.

“Iowa now has the flexibility to cut paperwork and simplify a hundred percent of state activities funding streams. It can invest in proven strategies to build a world-class teacher pipeline, close achievement gaps, and open post secondary opportunities to prepare for a great career,” McMahon said.

Under the waiver, certain federal requirements will be dropped so that less strings are attached giving the state more flexibility in using the aid. Prior to the formal waiver request, the state submitted a Unified Allocation Plan to show how it would use its funds to improve academic outcomes for Iowa’s education programs. The plan includes supporting effective educator development, English language acquisition, among other topics, according to state education leaders.

The approval of the waiver bolsters McMahon’s mission to reduce the federal government’s role in education nationwide. But education is already a local-level issue in the U.S. On average, state and local education agencies provide about 90% of public school funding across the country.

The agency is also working with about six additional states on their waiver requests, an Education Department spokesperson confirmed to ABC News.

Title VIII of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 allows states and tribes to submit requests to waive any statutory or regulatory requirement seeking to “reduce administrative burden” and align programs with the needs of its students, according to a release from the Department of Education.

In addition to Iowa’s $9 million in flexible federal funding, the Education Department approved the state’s application for “Ed-Flex authority,” which allows the state to grant individual school districts waivers from certain federal requirements without first having to submit individual waiver requests, according to the release from the department.

McMahon made the announcement during her “Returning Education to the States Tour.”

During her first year as the nation’s top education official, McMahon has made about two dozen stops in states across the country aiming to identify the best educational practices on the local level and work with local leaders to scale those practices nationwide, she says.

Wednesday’s announcement allows state leaders to focus federal dollars on work that best improves the achievement of Iowa students, according to the release from the department. For the announcement, McMahon was joined by Iowa Gov. Kim Reynolds, director of Education McKenzie Snow, and surrounded by about a dozen students at Broadway Elementary School in Denison.

Reynolds touted Iowa’s education models, including teaching the science of reading and using evidence-based math and reading practices. She stressed that the move Wednesday means “moving the dial” towards returning education to the states.

“The more red tape that we cut from the federal level, the more Iowa can increase education quality,” she added.

“I look forward to continuing to improve student outcomes, reduce red tape for schools, support teachers, and ensure federal education dollars are focused toward state and local priorities where they make the greatest difference,” Reynolds said in a statement.

However, critics of the Trump administration’s education initiatives say they believe abolishing the agency and giving sole power to the states could harm the millions of students across the country.

The top Democrat on the House Education and Workforce Committee slammed McMahon’s approval of the education waiver for allegedly ignoring the law and abandoning marginalized students.

In a statement, Ranking Member Bobby Scott, D-Virginia, urged the Department to “refrain” from granting similar waivers to other states.

“Congress must not sit idly by as the Trump administration makes every effort to drag students, educators, and parents back into an era where students were denied the opportunities and resources they needed to succeed,” Scott said.

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(NEW YORK) — Former Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., in her first interview since resigning from Congress effective Monday, said on ABC’s “The View” on Wednesday that she disagrees with the Trump administration’s capture of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and the focus on Venezuela instead of other countries that contribute to the flow of drugs into the U.S.

Greene said that while she served on the House Homeland Security Committee, “it wasn’t Venezuela that we were ever talking about” regarding drug trafficking, and that “you can’t hold Maduro accountable and not hold Mexican cartels accountable, who are number one”.

The Trump administration has said it is taking action on stopping the flow of drugs from various countries, including Mexico. On Sunday, Trump said Colombia could face a similar fate as Venezuela, and he said Cuba was imminently “ready to fall.” He also said Mexico could be next, as the administration seeks to continue its battle against drug cartels.

The former congresswoman, who has previously pushed back against other U.S. foreign policy endeavors, insisted as well that she remains “America First,” which she said does not align with the U.S. military intervention in Venezuela.

“We campaigned, and I went to countless Trump rallies and stood on the stage with the president and stood on the stage with other Republican candidates and said ‘America First. No more regime change, no more foreign wars, no more foreign intervention.’ Enough of this. That’s what America First means,” she said. 

“Militarily invading a country, killing people in the process, arresting their leader and taking them out, then claiming this is for the Venezuelan people, and saying all the charges are about drugs, but then turning around and literally, every single statement is about Venezuelan oil and how it belongs to America … it’s not working.”

Greene also said a “deeper issue” for her on the U.S. action on Venezuela is that “if it’s OK to go into Venezuela and arrest Maduro, then why are we telling China you can’t go and take Taiwan? Why are we telling Russia you can’t go take Ukraine?” 

Greene, first elected to the House in 2020, had established herself as one of President Donald Trump’s closest allies and a staunch supporter of the MAGA movement he spearheaded. Greene came to define the MAGA movement on Capitol Hill, fighting Trump’s second impeachment following the Jan. 6 Capitol attack and wearing a “Make America Great Again” hat at then-President Joe Biden’s State of the Union address in 2024.

But she broke with Trump more recently on issues such as the Israel-Hamas war and releasing files related to sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. Trump withdrew his support for Greene in November after she criticized him and his administration for their handling of the Epstein investigation, along with other matters.

Greene announced that month that she would resign from the House, dropping a surprise bombshell soon after she was one of few Republicans to sign on to a discharge petition forcing a vote to order the Department of Justice to release the files. Her resignation before the end of her term leaves House Republicans with an even narrower majority — with 218 Republicans against 213 Democrats as of Wednesday, after Greene’s resignation and the death of GOP Rep. Doug LaMalfa of California on Tuesday. 

Greene said Wednesday she made the final decision to leave Congress when Trump called her a “traitor” and soon after, her son began to face death threats. She said she herself had faced threats previously and was used to them.

“One of MAGA’s big campaign pledges was to release the Epstein files. And then having to say ‘Am I going to have to be the next Charlie Kirk? Is my son going to get murdered because I’m trying to continue to do this job?'” she said, referencing the high-profile conservative activist who was assassinated in Utah in September. 

Asked how she would respond to people skeptical of her political transformation who think she is trying for a run for another office or to get ahead of potential Republican losses in the 2026 midterms, Greene replied, “I’ve been asked by every single person that’s interviewed me, ‘What are you running for?’ And I’ve said over and over again to exhaustion I’m not running for Senate. I’m not running for governor, I’m not running for president. So first of all, that narrative is just wrong about me.” 

She added later that her focus is on “using my voice to pull Americans on the right and the left together to focus on our collective problems, particularly affordability.”

Yet Greene had sharp criticism for Democrats when asked if she’d consider becoming one, saying that Democratic policies and actions contributed to issues at the southern border and both parties had contributed to ballooning national debt. 

She declined to say whether she’d leave the GOP.

“I haven’t said if I’m leaving the Republican Party, but my focus is America First, and my focus is — earn my vote,” she said. 

As for what’s next for her, Greene told “The View” that she hopes to spend more time with her children, her mother, and friends. 

Would she ever return to Congress if Trump asked her to? 

“Absolutely not — the way he treated me. No,” Greene said. 

ABC News’ Lauren Peller, John Parkinson, Jay O’Brien Will Steakin and Mariam Khan contributed to this report.

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — Secretary of State Marco Rubio on Wednesday laid out what he called a threefold process for Venezuela’s future, with the White House saying it has “maximum leverage” over the South American nation in the interim.

Since the dramatic capture of dictator Nicolas Maduro by U.S. forces, questions have swirled about who is running Venezuela and how.

President Donald Trump said earlier this week the U.S. was “in charge.” But Venezuela’s interim President Delcy Rodriguez pushed back on Tuesday that the Venezuelan government is in control and “no one else.”

ABC News Senior Political Correspondent Rachel Scott pressed White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt on Wednesday, “Which one is it?”

“We obviously have maximum leverage over the interim authorities in Venezuela right now,” Leavitt said. “And the president has made it very clear that this is a country within the United States — the Western Hemisphere, close by the United States, that is no longer going to be sending illegal drugs to the United States of America. It’s no longer going to be sending and trafficking illegal people and criminal cartels to kill American citizens, as they have in the past. And the president is fully deploying his peace-through-strength foreign policy agenda.”

“So, we’re continuing to be in close coordination with the interim authorities. And their decisions are going to continue to be dictated by the United States of America,” Leavitt added.

Leavitt also touted what she called a “historic energy deal” between the U.S. and Venezuela after Trump announced on Tuesday night that Venezuela will turn over 30 to 50 million barrels of sanctioned oil to the U.S.

Sources told ABC News that those barrels represent the first tranche to be handed over to U.S. control. The Trump administration intends to oversee the sale of Venezuela’s oil indefinitely and some sanctions against Venezuela will be lifted, two sources familiar with the plan told ABC News.

Rubio, speaking to reporters on Capitol Hill after a classified briefing with senators on Venezuela, echoed what he called “tremendous leverage and control” the U.S. now exerts over Caracas.

“We are in the midst right now, and in fact about to execute on a deal, to take all the oil — they have oil that is stuck in Venezuela, they can’t move it because of our quarantine, because it’s sanctioned,” he said.

Rubio pointed to a tanker that was captured in the Caribbean Wednesday by U.S. forces and said Venezuela’s interim leaders are cooperating because they want to make money off of it. 

“They want that oil that was seized to be part of this deal. They understand that the only way they can move oil and generate revenue and not have economic collapse is if they cooperate and work with the United States. And that’s what we see are going to happen,” Rubio said. 

Rubio also described a threefold process going forward with regards to the U.S. role in Venezuela.

The first phase, he said, was stabilization of the country.

The second involves “recovery” by ensuring that American, western and other oil companies have access to the Venezuelan oil market in a way that’s fair, Rubio said. He added that this phase would include offering amnesty to opposition forces in Venezuela, allowing for people to be released from prisons and brought back into their home country to “rebuild civil society.” 

The third phase is the “transition” of the Venezuelan government, Rubio said. He didn’t offer any details as to what that would include, but said he described to senators the administration’s thinking in “great detail.” 

Neither Rubio nor the White House provided a specific timeline on what’s next.

“In the end, it will be up to the Venezuelan people to transform their country,” Rubio said.

“I understand that in this cycle, in the society we now live in, everyone wants instant outcomes. They want it to happen overnight. It’s not going to work that way. But work — we’re already seeing progress with this new deal that’s been announced and more deals to follow. You are already seeing how the leverage the United States have over those interim authorities is going to begin to lead to positive outcomes.”

Pressed on when elections may be held in Venezuela, Leavitt maintained Trump’s assertion that it’s “too early” to set a date.

“So, I will reiterate what the president has said a few times now to all of you, which is that it’s too premature and too early to dictate a timetable for elections in Venezuela right now,” Leavitt said.

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.