EXCLUSIVE: The National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC) Chair Rep. Richard Hudson pledges to go ‘on offense’ in next year’s elections to expand the GOP’s razor-thin majority in the House of Representatives.

‘We’re on offense. We’re not going to protect our majority. We’re going to grow our majority. I think this list is very realistic and I think we’ve got some real opportunities to pick up seats,’ Hudson told Fox News in an exclusive interview on Monday.

The list the six-term Republican from North Carolina referred to includes 37 target Democratic held seats that the House GOP re-election committee’s going to aim to flip from blue to red in 2024, in hopes of expanding their current extremely fragile four-seat majority. The list includes two open Democratic seats currently held by Reps. Katie Porter of California and Elissa Slotkin of Michigan, who are running for the Senate rather than re-election in the House next year.

Republicans won back control of the chamber from the Democrats in November’s midterm elections, but an expected red wave never materialized and hopes for a larger majority in the House disappeared. Some of the districts the NRCC is targeting are races they heavily invested in during the 2022 cycle but were unsuccessful in flipping.

But Hudson says ‘it’ll be a presidential cycle so it will be very different. I think the turnout models will be different.’

HOUSE DEMOCRATS’ CAMPAIGN CHAIR TAKES AIM AT THE GOP MAJORITY

He also praised his predecessor as NRCC chair – House Majority Whip Rep. Tom Emmer of Minnesota – for ‘recruiting unique and diverse candidates who reflect their districts and so we’re going to continue to do that. I think recruitment’s going to be really important.’

Hudson also pointed to fundraising, noting that ‘one of the big difference makers last election was the money gap that our candidates had compared to the Democratic incumbents in particular. We’re looking at ways we can fix that. We’ve got to get more candidate dollars to our candidates, make sure they’re better funded.’

Hudson emphasized that one thing the NRCC won’t do is take sides in contested GOP House primaries.

‘We’ve got a long-standing policy at the NRCC to not get involved in open seat primaries by endorsing candidates. We won’t do that,’ he said. 

But, he added, ‘I think you may see us get involved earlier in terms of helping people build better campaigns. If we’ve got an open seat and there are a number of candidates that we think have a good chance of winning in the general election and reach out to us and want to work with us, then we’re going to work with them and make sure they build strong campaigns even in the primaries.’

Top of the ticket races traditionally influence down ballot contests – and a major factor that will likely heavily impact the 2024 fight for the House majority will be the White House race – and the battle for the GOP presidential nomination.

Asked how the burgeoning Republican presidential primary race – where fireworks are already flying – may impact his mission to expand the House majority, Hudson answered: ‘I don’t know. Obviously I hope we have a Republican nominee for president who can run away with it and has huge coattails.’

‘We’ve got to hope for the best and prepare for the worst,’ he added. ‘And make sure we’re building strong campaigns and make sure that we’re doing a better job getting funds directly to our candidates, so they’re better positioned than the Democrats.’

The NRCC’s target list was released three days after their counterpart, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) released its own list of 29 vulnerable ‘front line’ members.

‘House Republicans have shown voters their caucus is more concerned with political investigations, empowering extremists, and seeking power for themselves, than working to improve the lives of everyday families – and that will stand in clear contrast to the formidable Democratic Frontliners,’ DCCC Chair Rep. Suzan DelBene of Washington state said in a statement Friday. ‘Democrats will have great offensive opportunities in 2024, and holding onto these seats is key to our path to reclaiming the majority.’

The DCCC has not yet released its own target list of red seats it hopes to flip next year.

Illinois will become one of three states to require employers to offer paid time off for any reason after Gov. J.B. Pritzker signed a law on Monday that will take effect next year.

Starting Jan. 1, Illinois employers must offer workers paid time off based on hours worked, with no need to explain the reason for their absence as long as they provide notice in accordance with reasonable employer standards.

Just Maine and Nevada mandate earned paid time off and allot employees the freedom to decide how to use it, but Illinois’ law is further reaching, unencumbered by limits based on business size. Similarly structured regulations that require employers to offer paid sick leave exist in 14 states and Washington, D.C., but workers can only use that for health-related reasons.

Illinois employees will accrue one hour of paid leave for every 40 hours worked up to 40 hours total, although the employer may offer more. Employees can start using the time once they have worked for 90 days. Seasonal workers will be exempt, as will federal employees or college students who work non-full-time, temporary jobs for their university.

Pritzker signed the bill Monday in downtown Chicago, saying: ‘Too many people can’t afford to miss even a day’s pay … together we continue to build a state that truly serves as a beacon for families, and businesses, and good paying jobs.’

Proponents say paid leave is key to making sure workers, especially low-income workers who are more vulnerable, are able to take time off when needed without fear of reprisal from an employer.

But critics say the law will overburden small businesses already struggling to survive the post-pandemic era amid the high inflation that has gripped the nation for nearly two years.

National Federation of Independent Business Illinois state director Chris Davis said that business owners are best positioned to work with their employees one-on-one to meet their needs.

The new law is ‘a one-size-fits-all solution to a more intricate problem,’ he said.

Bill sponsor Rep. Jehan Gordon-Booth, a Peoria Democrat, said the bill is the product of years of negotiations with businesses and labor groups.

‘Everyone deserves the ability to take time off,’ she said in a statement. ‘Whether it’s to deal with the illness of a family member, or take a step back for your mental health, enshrining paid leave rights is a step forward for our state.’

‘This is about bringing dignity to all workers,’ she said at the signing.

Ordinances in Cook County and Chicago that already require employers to offer paid sick leave have been in place since July 2017, and workers in those locations will continue to be covered by existing laws rather than the new state law.

Any new local laws enacted after the state law takes effect must provide benefits that are greater or equal to the state law.

Molly Weston Williamson, paid leave expert at the Center for American Progress, said the law ‘creates a strong foundation for employers to build from while generating a healthier, more productive workforce.’

But Williamson added that while Illinois’ law is a step in the right direction, U.S. paid leave laws remain ‘wildly out of line with all of our economic peers internationally.’

‘In the United States, federal law does not guarantee anyone the right to even a single paid day off work. Not when you’re sick, not when you have a baby, not when your mom has a stroke. Not a single paid day,’ she said.

Joan Van, a server at an international hotel chain and single mother of three, currently has no paid time off.

But the Belleville parent leader with Community Organizing and Family Issues said that knowing that she will have five days next year brings a smile to her face.

‘It’s going to help out a lot of people, a lot of mothers, a lot of single mothers at that,’ she said.

Last month, President Biden’s Department of Energy proposed new efficiency standards for washing machines that requires new appliances to use considerably less water, all in an effort to ‘confront the global climate crisis.’ 

Leading industry corporations have voice their opinion on the rule, claiming the mandates force manufacturers to reduce cleaning performance to ensure their machines comply. Each cycle will ‘take longer, the detergent will cost more, and in the end, the clothes will be less clean,’ according to manufacturers like Whirlpool. 

The proposed washing machine change is the latest example of the Biden administration pushing more consumer regulations to advance green initiatives. In February, the administration received heat for a leaked proposal which would have banned half of America’s gas stoves in addition to another proposal to heavily regulate refrigerators. 

‘Like many efficiency standards, the government claims that although these standards will raise the cost of appliances, they are justified because they will reduce consumer spending on energy & water even more. Of course, if that were true, consumers would likely buy more efficient appliances anyway, given that studies show consumers consider energy and water costs,’ American Enterprise Institute Senior Fellow James Coleman told Fox News Digital. ‘If consumers do fully consider what they will pay on energy in their individual circumstances, then the standards would, on-net, harm consumers.’

‘This proposal builds on the more than 110 actions the Biden-Harris Administration took in 2022 to strengthen energy efficiency standards and save the average family at least $100 annually through lower energy bills,’ the Department of Energy said in a press release. ‘Collectively these energy efficiency actions will reduce greenhouse gas emissions by more than 2.4 billion metric tons, save consumers $570 billion cumulatively over 30 years, and support President Biden’s ambitious clean energy agenda to combat the climate crisis.’

The Association of Home Appliance Manufacturers argued that the Energy Department’s washing machine regulations ‘would have a disproportionate, negative impact on low-income households’ by eliminating cheaper appliances from the market. The Energy Department estimates that manufacturers will incur nearly $700 million in conversion costs to transition to the new machines.

‘The proposal also argues that it won’t reduce appliance performance, but skepticism is warranted because past regulations have often been found to reduce performance,’ Coleman told Fox News Digital.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., was discharged from a hospital Monday after being treated for a concussion from his fall at a hotel in Washington, D.C., last week. 

In a statement, a spokesperson for McConnell said the recovery was ‘proceeding well.’

‘At the advice of his physician, the next step will be a period of physical therapy at an inpatient rehabilitation facility before he returns home,’ said David Popp, communications director for McConnell. ‘Over the course of treatment this weekend, the Leader’s medical team discovered that he also suffered a minor rib fracture on Wednesday, for which he is also being treated.’

‘The Leader and Secretary Chao are deeply thankful for the skilled medical care, prayers, and kindness they have received,’ Popp added. 

McConnell, 81, was hospitalized for several days after his Wednesday fall while attending an evening dinner for the Senate Leadership Fund, a political action committee aligned with him, when he tripped and fell.

The event was at the Waldorf Astoria Washington DC, formerly the Trump International Hotel, Washington, D.C.

In August 2019, McConnell fractured his shoulder after a fall at his Louisville home. As a child, the senator was treated for polio, and he has since acknowledged some difficulty in adulthood in climbing stairs. 

Fox News’ Brooke Singman and Chris Pandolfo contributed to this report. 

North Carolina Republican legislative leaders can defend in federal court the state restrictions on dispensing abortion pills that are being challenged by a physician, a judge has ruled.

U.S. District Judge William Osteen granted the request by House Speaker Tim Moore and Senate leader Phil Berger to formally intervene in the lawsuit filed in January.

Berger and Moore specifically sought involvement after the office of Democratic state Attorney General Josh Stein told the legislators that it believed the arguments by the lawsuit plaintiff about the drug mifepristone were ‘legally correct.’ State attorneys representing Stein, a case defendant but an abortion rights supporter, said the same in a written response to the lawsuit.

Osteen’s ruling on Friday wasn’t surprising. State law already gives the House speaker and Senate leader the ability to intervene in litigation to defend North Carolina’s statutes. A U.S. Supreme Court decision last summer involving North Carolina’s voter ID law also affirmed their ability to enter cases.

Dr. Amy Bryant — the physician who sued — as well as Stein and other defendants didn’t oppose the legislators’ intervention request.

Bryant’s lawsuit alleges state laws and rules conflict with her ability to provide mifepristone to patients. She said those restrictions should be preempted by powers the U.S. Food and Drug Administration hold to regulate the drug.

Osteen told Berger and Moore to file a written response to the lawsuit by March 24. In a previous document, the legislative leaders wrote that North Carolina abortion regulations apply ‘with equal force to both surgical and chemical abortion procedures’ and that Bryant’s arguments would mean the state couldn’t regulate the safety of chemical abortions.

Backers of a proposal to enshrine abortion rights in the Ohio Constitution can begin collecting the more than 413,000 voter signatures required to put the issue before voters this fall, after the petition cleared another hurdle Monday.

The constitutional amendment moves to the signature-gathering phase after the Ohio Ballot Board confirmed the petition language contains only one proposed amendment.

Abortion remains legal in the state up to 20 weeks’ gestation, under a judge’s order issued in a lawsuit challenging a ban once cardiac activity can be detected, or around six weeks into pregnancy. The Republican attorney general has asked the Ohio Supreme Court to overturn the stay.

The fall ballot proposal would assure access to abortion until what is called viability, when the fetus could survive outside the womb. It also would protect caregivers from being punished for performing the procedure or aiding the process.

Ohio Physicians for Reproductive Rights and Ohioans for Reproductive Freedom are aiming to get that proposed constitutional amendment on ballots this November.

Under state law, the groups must collect 413,446 valid voter signatures — 10% of the votes in the last governor’s race — statewide, across at least 44 of Ohio’s 88 counties. Their deadline is July 5 to make the Nov. 7 ballot.

They say they are aiming to gather at least 700,000 signatures to ensure they meet the requirement.

Anti-abortion groups are vowing to fight the proposal and are already urging Ohio residents to vote against it if it makes it to the ballot.

South Dakota lawmakers are taking a break in the legislative session until they return later in March to consider any bills Republican Gov. Kristi Noem vetoed.

Republican legislative leaders were focused on cutting taxes when the session began in January. They now can declare victory on that topic.

The record was more mixed on other topics, ranging from restricting gender-affirming care for transgender people to limiting foreign ownership of farmland.

Here is a rundown on how the session’s top issuesfared:

Biggest Tax Break in State History

As legislators opened the session with a $423 million surplus, lawmakers were intent on passing a sales tax cut — and they accomplished that goal earlier this month. The Legislature approved a general sales tax cut from 4.5% to 4.2% that is set to end after four years. The change is expected to reduce taxes by $104 million per year.

The legislation included removal of a mechanism known as the ‘Partridge Amendment,’ which gradually reduced the state’s sales tax as more money was collected from internet sales.

Rather than the general sales tax reduction, Noem had campaigned for reelection on a promise to repeal sales taxes on groceries. Since legislators took a different approach, it wasn’t clear whether she would sign the legislation.

‘I still believe that the best budget option for our state’s future is the one that I presented in December, including the elimination of the sales tax on groceries,’ Noem said Friday in a statement. ‘And in the coming weeks, I will have to decide whether the budget that has been presented to me is worthy of my signature.’

Stoking Fears Against China

Many lawmakers voiced fears about foreign businesses in the state but struggled to agree on strategies for restricting them.

While Noem favored creating a chapter of the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States to judge whether a foreign entity was eligible to purchase 160 acres or more of land, some lawmakers preferred streamlined procedures to simply count foreign ownership.

‘China’s kind of coming in the front door. Nobody’s putting any restrictions on anything and when you really start paying attention and looking at what’s happening, you get even more concerned,’ said Republican Sen. Erin Tobin, whose bill for an oversight committee was defeated.

Lawmakers and the cattle industry opposed Noem’s proposal, pointing out flaws in the mechanics and cautioning against pitting business opportunities against national security.

The legislature approved a bill to require agricultural businesses to document whether their land is owned by a foreign entity for government records, as well as a bill that will cut ties between the government and overseas businesses.

Culture War Issues

Noem signed into law a bill that prohibits gender-affirming care for transgender people younger than 18.

The new law bans the prescription of puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones and gender-affirming surgery for minors. By approving the legislation, lawmakers pushed back against opponents who argued that such treatment can help young people psychologically and reduce the risk of suicide among minors.

The new measure would see medical licenses removed from health care providers who provide banned treatment to transgender youth, despite criticism from the state’s leading health organizations. It’s unclear whether this will result in a lawsuit, as has been the case with similar laws across the country.

This is the latest move opposed by transgender advocates that Noem has signed. Last year, the governor imposed a ban on transgender girls and college-age women playing in state school leagues.

‘Every year, South Dakota lawmakers zero in on transgender youth,’ said Samantha Chapman with the ACLU of South Dakota. ‘And every year the transgender community is hurt while meaningful problems go unaddressed.’

Separately, some Republican lawmakers backed restrictions on drag shows on state university campuses and other publicly funded spaces and sought to stop children from attending such events. That effort ultimately failed.

A bill to ban library books ‘harmful to minors’ also lost in an initial hearing.

Tribal Sovereignty

In South Dakota, native youth are put into foster care at three times the rate of white youth, and some lawmakers proposed a bill aimed at placing Native American children with other relatives when they are removed from their families.

The move came as the U.S. Supreme Court considers challenges to the federal Indian Child Welfare Act, which gives preference to Native American families in foster care and adoption proceedings for Native American children.

‘What can the tribes do better and what can the states do better?’ Democratic Rep. Peri Pourier said when presenting a statewide Indian Child Welfare Act bill. ‘What it really boils down to is a relationship built on trust.’

Other states have added similar protections to state law, but such efforts failed in South Dakota, and proposals again didn’t pass this session. Supporters expressed disappointment that Noem and Democratic legislators couldn’t work together on such a bill.

Property Rights vs. Pipelines

Ranchers called for restrictions on the use of eminent domain to install carbon capture pipelines, but lawmakers opted not to approve limitations out of concern it could hurt the state’s ethanol industry and break business agreements.

The lack of action means carbon sequestration companies like Summit Carbon Solutions and Navigator CO2 can continue using eminent domain to build pipelines across the state as part of a larger regional network.

Those opposed to the limits expressed concern that restrictions could lead to legal action against the state and argued the pipelines would help South Dakota’s long-term agricultural industry.

Election Rules

While South Dakota said the state’s electoral system is safe and accurate, lawmakers still approved changes to election laws.

‘South Dakota has an excellent election system but we can always be better,’ said Republican Rep. Tony Venhuizen.

The new measures include slight changes in recounts and runoffs through language and proceedings, such as a law that enables candidates outside the primary election to run. Candidates tied for second place would be required to participate in the runoff election alongside the first-place candidates if the margin is less than 35%.

Republicans on the Senate Banking Committee on Monday said the quick collapse of Silicon Valley Bank and the sudden need for a bailout plan shows federal regulators may not have been as aware of the situation as they should have been.

Sen. Cynthia Lummis, R-Wyo., accused regulators of being ‘asleep at the wheel’ in a statement to Fox News Digital after the sixteenth-largest U.S. bank collapsed within roughly 48 hours. A short while later, federal regulators shut down the cryptocurrency-focused Signature Bank in New York.

‘As a member of the Senate Banking Committee, I have been following the events of the last week closely. These events are the result of some federal bank regulators being asleep at the wheel and shockingly poor management by an isolated number of banks,’ Lummis told Fox News Digital.

She also stood firm against ‘any bailout of these banks’ beyond the current federal requirements — after the Biden administration vowed that investor funds will be recouped fully, beyond the $250,000 maximum deposit protected by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC). ‘A bailout would encourage risky behaviors by similar institutions down the road,’ she said.

Biden officials have insisted that they are not bailing out SVB’s investors, and that funds used to make bank customers whole would not be paid for with taxpayer receipts, but with fees collected from banks.

Silicon Valley Bank was shut down by regulators following a rush of investors withdrawing funds, resulting in the largest U.S. bank failure since the 2008 financial crisis.

Lummis said she would ‘continue to be engaged on this issue’ and expressed confidence that ‘Wyoming’s banks and credit unions remain strong.’

She did add that she is ‘gravely concerned that Wyoming banks will be charged higher insurance premiums to pay for the FDIC recovering uninsured deposits.’

Sen. Katie Britt, R-Ala., another member of the Banking Committee, listed off multiple questions she still had about the financial turmoil in comments to Fox News Digital just before Senate Republicans received their own briefing on it — after claiming many were excluded from the Treasury’s initial briefing to Congress on Sunday night.

‘Why did regulators not see this coming? Did Silicon Valley’s focus on ESG distract from their fiduciary responsibilities, in turn contributing to its collapse?’ Britt asked.

‘Ultimately, American taxpayers should not have to foot the bill for bank executives’ mismanagement and regulators’ failure. I will continue to support the strength of our financial system, which is crucial to hardworking families, small businesses, retirees, and communities in every corner of our nation.’

Sen. Tim Scott, R-S.C., the top Republican on the banking panel, also signaled wariness at too much federal intervention in a press statement made on Sunday night.

‘Building a culture of government intervention does nothing to stop future institutions from relying on the government to swoop in after taking excessive risks,’ Scott said at the time.

The U.S. government may have made duplicate payments for projects at labs in Wuhan, China, through the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), according to records reviewed by CBS News. 

‘What I’ve found so far is evidence that points to double billing, potential theft of government funds. It is concerning, especially since it involves dangerous pathogens and risky research,’ said Diane Cutler, a former federal investigator with over two decades of experience combating white-collar crime and healthcare fraud. 

Cutler found evidence of possible double payments as she investigated U.S. government grants that supported high risk research in China leading up to the COVID-19 pandemic. She was hired by Republican Sen. Roger Marshall, R-Kansas, who took her records to USAID, which launched a new probe.

Cutler said she viewed over 50,000 documents, and that the U.S. government may have made duplicate payments for possible medical supplies, equipment, travel, and salaries. 
 

‘I think there’s 1.1 million reasons that American taxpayers should care,’ Marshall said. ‘You’ll have a plane crashes. We want to find out why the plane crashes. We go to any lengths to do that. And the hope is we don’t have another plane crash for the same reason.’ 

FAUCI CLAIMS US GAVE $600,000 TO WUHAN LAB RESEARCH; DOCUMENTS SHOW IT WAS MORE

While intelligence agencies have not been able to reach a consensus on the origin of the pandemic, the FBI and Energy Department have found an accidental lab leak is plausible. The Wuhan Institute of Virology conducted viral research in the city where the SARS-CoV-2 virus first emerged. 

During a recent congressional hearing regarding the origins of COVID-19, the House voted unanimously on a bill ordering the declassification of intelligence about the origins. Robert Redfield, the former director of the CDC, testified that money from the NIH, the State Department, USAID and the Defense Department provided funding for high-risk virus research in Wuhan.