The NPR Politics Podcast - A New Congress Takes Shape; Stefanik's Stock Rises; 'Spare' Sparks Drama

Episode Date: January 13, 2023

With a narrow majority in the House, Republicans will need to find ways to work with Democrats — who still control the Senate and the White House. What battles may loom large for the new Congress?As those battles are waged, one person will be on the front lines: New York Republican Elise Stefanik, who chairs the Republican conference. Her rise from a bipartisan member of Congress to a staunch defender of Donald Trump has drawn attention.And, among the things we can't let go of this week? A certain royal's memoir. This episode: White House correspondent Asma Khalid, congressional correspondent Claudia Grisales, political correspondent Susan Davis, and national correspondent Brian Mann.This episode was produced by Elena Moore and Casey Morell. It was edited by Casey Morell. Our executive producer is Muthoni Muturi. Research and fact-checking by Devin Speak.Unlock access to this and other bonus content by supporting The NPR Politics Podcast+. Sign up via Apple Podcasts or at plus.npr.org. Connect:Email the show at [e-mail] the NPR Politics Podcast Facebook Group.Subscribe to the NPR Politics Newsletter.Learn more about sponsor message choices: podcastchoices.com/adchoicesNPR Privacy Policy

Hello, this is David and Jordan from Arlington, Virginia. We are enjoying the last night of our honeymoon beachside at Playa del Carmen in Mexico. This podcast was recorded at 1146 AM on Friday, January 13th of 2023. Things may have changed by the time you hear this podcast, but we will be catching up on all the NPR podcast episodes we've missed since January 1st, the day we got married. Enjoy the show. That's so sweet. I hope they had a great honeymoon. But for a second, I'll admit I thought they were going to say they were honeymooning in Arlington, Virginia.

And I got a little nervous for that. Mexico is a much better honeymoon destination. I'll do respect to Arlington. Hey there, it's the NPR Politics Podcast. I'm Asma Khalid. I cover the White House. I'm Claudia Grisales. I cover Congress. And I'm Susan Davis. I cover politics. And it might have taken a little while, but last Saturday in the early hours of the day, the new House of Representatives took office.

Congratulations. You are now members of the 118th Congress. The GOP is now in control of the House, and they're going to have to figure out how to bargain with a Democratic Senate, much less a Democratic president, if they want to get anything done beyond oversight and accountability, which we all know, of course, are very high on their agenda. And Claudia, I want to start with you because you cover Congress. You know, I imagine that the first few days of a new Congress are maybe a little bit like the first few days of school, especially if you're a new member. But this was not the typical start to a new legislative session. Not at all. I was actually on vacation that week and I could not turn away. I came off vacation to cover it because it was just so compelling and just amazing to see this play out.

All of this back and forth between members of the Republican Party. We talk about they have to bargain with the Democratic Senate, Democratic White House, but now they have to bargain with each other. They have to figure out how to work with each other. And they showed what a difficult task that would be going through 15 rounds until Kevin McCarthy was finally selected, elected as the House Speaker. But it's interesting when members of the Republican Party came back after all of that drama. It did feel like the first day of school on that Monday when they came back.

It was a delayed start. Yeah, it was a delayed start to school because there were all these hugs and there were these happy moments in there, relief. It just was really interesting being in the chamber after that whole chaotic week. And they had sorted everything out. And they seem to be on the same page with each other on some votes this week, very much so, especially some intense votes involving the abortion issue and what have you. So maybe they're at this point, they're figuring things out. Of course, McCarthy made a deal to get past his 20 rebels that were fighting him to be speaker. And we've heard a lot of those details, but there's more details that could be

So I want to actually ask you about that. I mean, one of the ways that Kevin McCarthy managed to win the speakership was by agreeing to a bunch of changes to the House rules package. Help us understand what these concessions were and, frankly, why they matter. Yeah, these are a really big deal because McCarthy did have to give away a lot. And Sue has mentioned this a few times, that he really becomes one of the weakest speakers in recent memory in terms of everything he gave away. For example, just one member of his conference can trigger a vote to oust him as Speaker. And so we could see a replay of this fight over his role leading the chamber. And so there's other issues he agreed to. I talked to one member, Chip Roy of Texas, and he was telling us we were all asking for things. He was kind of the key member who kind of broke the dam on those defectors and started to move things towards McCarthy's way. I kind of scoff and laugh at

this notion that there's some secret dealmaking. Like we were talking to people. Now, you don't negotiate in public. Like you got to sit down and talk through it and kind of get agreement and shake hands and say, let's go rock and roll. And that's what we did. So every member tried to negotiate kind of their interests out of that deal. And so we do know about some of it. But again, there's some of it we don't know. We're going to hear over time. He has a very slim majority in the House. And there is certainly a decent chunk of his conference that have vocally said that they are not necessarily big fans of him. And I'm curious what kinds of risks beyond possibly being ousted that he has now opened himself up to. Republicans have made a lot of promises to themselves right now. They've made a lot of promises about, oh, we're going to lower spending.

We're not going to raise the debt limit unless we get concessions to reform the budget system. That's all well and good. But there's also a broader reality here that Washington is divided. Democrats control the Senate. Democrats control the White House. And McCarthy has this very narrow balancing act of needing to deliver some element of the promises that he has just made to his own party for the people to get the speakership and the reality that you're not going to be able to achieve as much as these people want to achieve in any legislative act that requires Chuck Schumer's approval and Joe Biden's signature. So I want to ask you about a follow-up there because you mentioned that, you know, Republicans have to contend with the fact that Democrats do control the Senate and that a Democrat is sitting in the White House. And so I am curious to the degree that

this speakership fight exposes at all, you know, limitations to McCarthy's ability to actually hold all Republicans together, because there's certainly going to be pressure, right, on some of the more moderate Republicans to just go along with Democrats on certain basic things like funding the government. You know, on the big partisan fights, I still think members want to stick with their own party as much as possible, because those are oftentimes loyalty tests. The other challenge that McCarthy, I think, is going to face is it's not just Senate Democrats he needs to contend with, it's Senate Republicans. And he and Mitch McConnell, the Republican leader in the Senate, have very different jobs. And McConnell has taken a very different approach to shut down fights and

to debt fights. And McConnell doesn't like them. He doesn't like being seen as the party that's willing to threaten a default. He doesn't want to be seen as the party that's willing to shut down the government. He's lived through enough of these fights to know that there's very little political benefit to it. And all of this is going to be happening in the backdrop of a presidential election. You've mentioned debt ceiling there a couple times. That is certainly one of the big battles that Congress is going to have to contend with. Are there other big battles in the next couple of months or year that we can anticipate Congress will need to deal with? I think oversight is going to be a big issue in terms of how the Biden administration deals with that. You have Jim Jordan leading judiciary, you have James Comer leading House oversight. And how do they tackle these investigations? You know, hot off the news that there's classified documents that were recovered tied to President Biden as well. And so they're trying to turn the tables there. This was the theme that they raised after they won the majority, albeit a slim majority, is that they were going to

turn the tables on everything they could. January 6th, for example, was going to be another area of turning the tables. They've launched this new weaponization committee to look into concerns with federal agencies, such as the FBI, for example. And so those are going to be other areas that are going to take up a lot of the oxygen for Congress in the next two years. I also think immigration is an issue that we haven't had a lot of immigration fights, at least in the past couple of years, that immigration could be part of more of the bloodstream of Washington. I think it's an issue that Republicans want to see more of an issue. And also, I don't think that they think that the Democratic Party has a lot of good answers on the immigration question, on border security, on all of it. And I think that they, on that issue, I think they feel the most on offensive, especially towards the Biden administration. Their party's ability to sort of refocus the

political conversation on immigration is one that I certainly am also watching this Congress. So there's been a number of changes to leadership, both on the Republican and the Democratic side. What do you make of that all? You know, I personally am also really interested to see how these leadership teams work. You know, it's not just Kevin McCarthy who's going to run the House Republican Conference. They've got a whole new leadership lineup. This is also true for the Democratic Party. This is the first Congress where Nancy Pelosi hasn't been leading the party in a generation almost. So there's a lot of newbies in leadership and a lot of people trying to figure out how to do these jobs, a lot of people who

haven't been in the majority before or haven't been in the minority before. So I think this is a Congress where there's going to be a lot of growing pains. And it's unclear to me who the winners will ultimately be in the end, but it should be interesting to watch. And we're going to talk a lot more about one of those leaders in the Republican conference when we get back. But first, we've got to say goodbye to you for now, Claudia, but do not go too far away because I know you're coming back for Can't Let It Go. Very pumped about that. Definitely. All right. We're going to take a quick break and we'll be back in a moment. And we're back.

And NPR's Brian Mann joins us now from his base in upstate New York. Hey there, Brian. Thanks for having me. So we should be clear that the reason, or one of the reasons we asked you to join us, is that there has been quite a bit of political news out of your neck of the woods. And you've been doing some fantastic reporting on a woman who I would say I think is one of the most fascinating women in Washington, Elise Stefanik. She's risen through the ranks of Republican of the People's House, the Honorable Kevin McCarthy from the state of California. And I yield back. She is the fourth ranking member of the Republican majority. And

Brian, I think that one of the things that is so fascinating about Elise Stefanik is that she seems to have had this political metamorphosis. She went from being a fairly establishment Republican who served in the Bush administration to becoming a loyal defender of the former President Donald Trump. And you have covered her, though, from the start. My understanding is you actually live in her district. So help us understand how she got to where she is now. Yeah, this is one of the most amazing political journeys I've ever covered as a reporter. She showed up here in northern New York in 2014, a brand new face, just 30 years old, clearly ambitious, a Harvard graduate, smart, really great on policy, really engaged and, you know, just worked super hard to engage and win over voters.

And that's really what she's shown in all the years since. Incredibly ambitious, somebody who connects, works with big mentors, a former close ally of Paul Ryan. She's now, as you say, really close with Donald Trump, a whole different crowd. So a politician who's been willing to adapt and move fast, and it's been a remarkable rise. You know, one of the easiest explanations to me about Stefanik's evolution is her district. You know, this is one of those places in America that has seen one of the most dramatic political swings in recent years. It's predominantly white, working class. It is a place that former President Barack Obama won handily in 2008, and then quickly pretty shifted to Trump territory. Former President Donald Trump won there

in 2016 and in 2020. And it's become, you know, more of a Trumpian place. And I think Stefanik's, especially as an ambitious Republican, right, if you are an ambitious Republican lawmaker in the Trump era, there's really no way to build your profile or grow within the party without being seen as a Trump loyalist. And I think she's proven herself to be very ambitious. I think she continues to see a political future for herself. And while there's a lot of current angst over Donald Trump and his role in the party, it's still a safer place within the comforts of the Republican Party to be seen as someone that Donald Trump looks at favorably.

I think that's exactly right. I think the other thing, though, that is true about Stefanik is that she just leaned in really hard. You know, she didn't just do what she needed to do to survive as a Republican. She clearly wanted to go from being a backbencher in upstate New York to somebody really at the center of Republican political power. She saw Donald Trump as the way to get there. And so she went all in. So it strikes me from what you both are saying, that Elise Stefanik is a go-getter, right? That at the time she won her seat in Congress, she was the youngest woman ever elected to the House. She was clearly ambitious. And so I'm curious if there were

any signs from the start about who she was and the idea that she was willing to reinvent herself, even perhaps create somewhat of a new persona if it was necessary politically. You know, something happened when I first started covering Elise Stefanik. Again, this was right at the start of her, you know, her career as a candidate. She showed up in the North Country and she began claiming that she was from this one little town here, a place called Willsboro, New York. And at first I thought, well, you know, this is her story. I'll go there and talk to people about, you know, who she is, what her childhood was like. And guys, I went there and could not find a single person who had ever met her,

who knew anything about her. They didn't even recognize her name. And it turned out that her parents owned kind of a second vacation home there, but she had very little history in that place. And at the time, it just seemed like kind of a small detail, a bit of carpet bagging by a politician, you know, looking for a place to kind of settle. But it really has stuck with me, this idea that this was, again, a very ambitious, very bright politician candidate who was open to this idea of full-scale reinvention. I've talked to a lot of Republicans in the years since, and they say, yeah, you know, she wasn't really from here, but she was smart. She was great on policy. And so we jumped on board and we backed her. So,

you know, that just bit of her history has always seemed like kind of a significant moment. So then she enters Congress. And Sue, it seems like when she was a newer member of the House, she had a fairly bipartisan voting record, at least at the outset. She did. And I think when I think of who she was in Congress when she first came in, I really think a lot about Paul Ryan. They knew each other. I think she saw him as sort of the model of the kind of legislator she wanted to see in the beginning. And I think a lot of Stefanik's evolution, because she hasn't really changed her positions on all of the issues, but I think what's changed about her is her style, right? Like,

I think she came in a little bit more like a Paul Ryan conservative in that she was, you know, relatively conservative in relation to everybody else in the party. But it was demeanor. Like, Ryan was always kind of like a nice Republican, you know, like he didn't like to engage in sort of the mean, mean spirited nature of modern politics. And wouldn't take to Twitter. Yeah. Like, you know, and even during the Trump era when he was speaker, like he really didn't like the personal attacks and the name calling.

Like, it just wasn't his style. And I think Stefanik started off a little bit more like that. She used to be a lot more accessible to the media in the Capitol. I would consider her more mainstream. And part of this evolution is she also, very similar to a lot of Trump conservatives, really doesn't like the media anymore. She doesn't like to engage certainly with mainstream media outlets, but she has also shifted and focuses really heavily on conservative media, which again, good for her brand, good for her political ambitions, and good for her sort of bona fides within the party and that wing of the party

that she has sought to cultivate. So part of the evolution is also just style. You know, part of what you're describing is style, but at the same time, I mean, there certainly were policy issues that she was championing that seemed to be supported by both Republicans and Democrats. Yeah, absolutely. You know, when she came in, she had a really top tier record from environmental groups. They thought she was pretty amazing. She was championing all kinds of things, including some ideas about climate change. She was really strong on gay rights. She talked about trying to fight for equal pay for women. Another thing that was a big part of her policy platform was a kind of neocon foreign policy

strong on defense narrative. She was really a big supporter of NATO. She described herself as a Russia hawk. These were things that she worked very closely with Democrats on the House Intelligence Committee She was really a big supporter of NATO. She described herself as a Russia hawk. These were things that she worked very closely with Democrats on the House Intelligence Committee and the Armed Services Committee. And a lot of that has really shifted. You know, when you look at what she talks about now, it's much more kind of MAGA-style resentment politics. It's a lot of anger.

Often she leans into conspiracy theories that really don't hold up under scrutiny. You know, part of it is that I just don't hear her talking about any policies very often. So as Sue's suggesting, there's a huge change in tone that has bled over into the area of policy and ideas. So Sue, one priority that Elise Stefanik really championed early on was an effort to recruit more women within the Republican Party to run for office. Has she stuck with that mission despite her kind of evolving politics? She absolutely has. And she's also worked and helped work to elect women that don't exactly align with her precise ideological worldview, too. I mean, her work has really been a numbers game to increase the number of Republican women in Congress. And to that end, I think she's been really successful

and gets a lot of credit for this within the party. This is where she has a lot of goodwill from her colleagues. A couple years ago, Republican women hit like a historical low, they were down to almost single digits. And it was kind of embarrassing. And Stefanik at the time was really forceful and really vocal about the fact that this was a problem for the party. And she has, to her credit from her colleagues, like put her money where her mouth is, like she's worked to recruit women to run for office. And she established a super PAC that I believe is donated to almost every Republican woman in Congress. They have methodically increased the number of women

in the House Republican Conference in the past couple of years. Now, other people have played roles in that, obviously, Speaker Kevin McCarthy, Tom Emmer, who ran the House Republican campaign operation, but she was very critical in that effort. And I think, you know, when it comes to Capitol Hill politics, that kind of stuff can't be undervalued because especially new lawmakers always remember the people who helped get them there and help them win. And I think it helps build the political alliances that she has behind her in the party. So what changed? Was it purely political opportunism or is there something else? You know, I've spoken with a lot of people who knew her through her career, the Republicans,

some of them are now never Trumpers, people who've, you know, really, you know, tried to push back against the MAGA movement. And a lot of them really do say this is a story of ambition. They believe that this is still a politician whose core ideas probably haven't changed very much. But Elise Stefanik saw a path, and that's at least what they believe, is that she read the tea leaves and thought that Donald Trump was the future of the party. She's continued to say that publicly. She believes that Donald Trump is the logical leader of the national GOP. And again, rather than being sort of stuck in the hinterlands of New York state politics, where it's kind of a dead end for Republicans, this is a very democratic state. She seems to have seen a real play here and decided that she

would really grab hold. I also think one of the sort of radicalizing points in her evolution was the first impeachment trial of former President Trump. She was one of, I think, about a dozen Republicans who were tapped to be part of that defense. And that she really embraced the role. She was aggressive, both in the hearings, to the media, to reporters afterwards. Former President Trump would praise her over Twitter. She really seemed to lean in and embrace that role. And I remember at the time, like talking to Republican lawmakers about her being like, does this surprise you, whatever. And they would, what some of her colleagues had said to me was that she really thought that Donald Trump was being unfairly impeached in that. That she actually, yes, like there's a part of this is that political, good politics, but also like she believed in the cause at that point. And that I think she saw the impeachment trial as a way to create a platform for herself

and defend the president. And also that she believed it was the right thing to do. And I feel like after impeachment, like there was no turning back for Stefanik. That was really a point where she defined who she was going to be now. And she has stuck to that very, very, very clearly. I think that's right. And I also think there's a personal element to this. I've spoken to people who've known Stefanik and worked with her, some of them just personal friends. And as she went deeper into Trump world, a lot of them corresponded with her, texted with her, spoke with her on the phone and said, you know, why are you embracing this guy so closely? And she's had a real break with

much of her history. Many of the Democrats she was friends with, you know, many of the Republicans she was friends with, you know, this of the Republicans she was friends with. You know, this political decision, especially after the impeachment process, where she really became a much more prominent public figure, there's been a cost for her personally. It's people who I spoke to say they think it's left her more isolated in this new kind of political world that she's in. And so, yeah, her public persona changed, but it really seems to have changed in terms of who she networks with privately as well.

All right, let's leave it there. Brian, thank you so much for joining us with all your reporting. We really appreciate it. Thanks for having me on. And let's take a quick break. And when we get back, it is time for Can't Let It Go. And we're back. It is time for Can't Let It Go. And we're back. And Claudia is back with us as well. Hey,

there again. Hi. So it is time now to end the show like we do every week with Can't Let It Go. That's the part of the show where we talk about the things from the week that we just cannot stop thinking about, politics or otherwise. And Claudia, since you are back with us again, why don't you kick it off? Yes, mine is otherwise. Mine is the queen known as Jennifer Coolidge, as she accepted her Golden Globe for performance in White Lotus. And so I don't know if you remember from her Emmy acceptance speech, she was played off. And it was a hilarious moment. We can relate to it here on radio when music is playing off and she starts dancing to it. And so she had her redemption at the Golden Globes and was able to go like almost four minutes. I actually watched it. I did not see this. I've watched it so many times. I can tell you it's three minutes and 52 seconds. So I would

urge you to take the time out to watch it because it's freaking brilliant. I could watch it a million times. It's one of the best acceptance speeches I've ever heard in my entire life. And of course, I'm obsessed with White Lotus. I'm obsessed with the creator of White Lotus. I think it's the day, I always make up this name, Mike White. I always want to call him Jack White. Mike White. And so she finally said what she wanted to say at the Emmy. She said, you know, this hook came out, like the vaudeville times at the Emmys, and I didn't say what I wanted to say, which was Jack White. Wait, did I do it again? Mike White. And so she's looking right at him. He's getting emotional in the audience. And she talks about how during her career, like she would get little bits of

work here and there. Like she pointed to Ryan Murphy, like, you help me out. And she was trying to think of others. No, it's just you, Ryan. You're the only one who helped me out. And then she talked about White Lotus and how it's changed her life and that her neighbors are talking to her now. And then she's invited to parties on her hill. She was never invited before. But it really marked her moment as a queen.

She could not leave film, television ever again. We need to have her in everything. She needs to go on a one-woman show around the country is what I would argue for. It's nice to see actors like her. I think it's hard to describe her as a character actor. She's always played these unique roles in films, but she's never really been award famous. Yes. And now she is. It's always kind of nice to see people who have literally, I think she's around 60 years old. Like she's had a whole career in the industry and never had the sort of esteem of the award season.

And she seems like so overwhelmed and grateful for it. Like, oh, maybe I am good at this. Exactly. Yeah. She had this funny moment where she talked about American Pie. And she's like, you know, there's sequels. I milk that to the bone. And I want them to keep going.

So, yes, it was like she's this character actor. But now she's on a whole new level. Thank goodness for White Lotus elevating her and Mike White elevating her in this series because she's got to be in a ton of more things, I hope. Asma, what can't you let go of this week? So what I cannot let go of. I felt like we all let go of this week? So what I cannot let go of, I felt like we all have a lot to, so what I cannot let go of, see, Claudia's laughing because I haven't even said it, because it's so exciting to me, guys. There's just so much going on in the news of Royals. Yes. So I'm sure you all know I'm talking about Harry and Meghan.

This week, Harry's new book comes out. Of course, I like tried to rush to my library site so I can put it on hold. I'm 83rd on hold. It's going to be a minute. You might just want to shove out the money for it if I want to read it. I know, right? So I feel like I have lots and lots of thoughts about this all. But what I am struck by is this idea that you seek solace in like more media exposure when you believe that the very downfall of your existence in the UK was the media. And like the solution of it is now to sort of just like expose and there's a sense of wanting to craft your narrative.

I think it's called controlling the narrative. But this idea that you want to be in the limelight, but you really only want to be in the limelight through a fully crafted narrative. Anyhow, I also just felt really uncomfortable, I will say, with the revelations about him and his brother fighting. I know. So sad. That made me the saddest. Yeah, I agree. Just because I feel like they had each other, their mom died, and I'm the mom of two boys, and I always have these existential questions of like, what when I grow up my boys don't get along yeah and I just felt that that was very um that was very sad to me it's also like to me part I thought that too was very surprising to me that

like the relationship between the two is not what we thought it was and certainly not what the British media shaped it as yeah and that to me me, is a good lesson in that we never really know famous people. You have no idea what really goes on behind closed doors. So have you guys started reading the new book? I chose audiobook because you hear him tell the stories with his inflection and his tone. And it really feels like he's bringing you in and talking to you. So the audiobook is my recommendation if you're interested. So it's worth the wait, you're saying. It's worth being number in and talking to you. So the audio book is my recommendation if you're interested. It's worth the wait. It's worth the wait. Number 83 on the wait list. In three years,

this is going to be your can't let it go again when you finally get the audiobook and listen to it. Yeah. Okay. You're convincing me. Maybe I need to get the audible version too, but I was up to one reading it and I was like yelling at myself, put this thing down. Stop reading. This is our sports. All right. So Sue, what can you not let go of? What I can't let go of is New York Congressman George Santos. Mr. Santos has radically embellished almost every aspect of his life story and almost everything he said about himself in the campaign. Certainly the big pillars of your life, his education background, his business background, his life background, his business background, his life experience, his family, the whole thing, just not true. And it's become a source of scandal,

not only for the embellishment, but also there's a lot of questions now about money and how his campaign was funded. He's already under investigation for some of those campaign finance questions. He's under investigation by a local district attorney over all the misrepresentations. At least half a dozen House Republicans have already called on him to resign. It's possible the House Ethics Committee could look into him. So not only can I not let it go. Brazil wants to talk to him.

The nation of Brazil, apparently he may have committed some fraud there, allegedly. But all of this is part of why I can't let it go. Is Speaker McCarthy's like, well, let's just let the justice system play out on this one. I mean, what choice does he have? It's a slim majority. I'm down to four members.

He's one of them for my majority. And I can't let it go because it just tells you the calculations sometimes you've got to make in politics. He's got a four-seat majority. George Santos was with him on all 15 ballots for speaker. He voted for McCarthy. He's voted with the party so far. He is a vote that Kevin McCarthy needs. It is sort of wild.

And it's both serious and comical, right? Like he's an elected official. Like people should be truthful. But he is also embellished. I don't know if we can say he lied because we don't know his motives or if he's aware that he's making these false statements or if he's misrepresenting them. But to the details of his life, to his faith, like he's lied about being Jewish and then joked later that he meant he was Jew colon ish. He's made up sports he played. He even in a debate with his opponent in the race, they were asked like, what's your favorite family activity? And

his opponent said, oh, I love the holidays where we all put on sweatpants and have good food like Haagen-Dazs ice cream. And then Santos went on and answered and said the exact same thing as his opponent had just said. He is fantastical in every way. I can't think of anyone in Congress in modern times who's had as much ethical problems as this man has, and he could be here to stay for quite a while. All right, well, that is a wrap for today. Our executive producer is Mithoni Maturi.

Our editor is Eric McDaniel. Our producers are Elena Moore and Casey Morrell. Thanks to Brandon Carter, Lexi Shapiro, Devin Speak, and Christian DeVcalibre. I'm Asma Khalid. I cover the White House. I'm Claudia DeSantis. I cover Congress. And I'm Susan Davis. I cover politics. And thank you all, as always, for listening to the NPR Politics Podcast.