Congress is back from August recess with a packed agenda and very little time. The Senate returns to a floor schedule crowded with crypto market structure legislation, a college sports bill, and a possible permitting overhaul — all while appropriators remain far apart on 2027 spending levels, the surface transportation extension rides along on a stopgap, and every calculation is shadowed by a midterm election that could flip one or both chambers.
On September 14, 2026, CQ Roll Call's Peter Cohn, managing editor, news, sat down with congressional leadership staff writer Savannah Behrmann and budget and appropriations staff writer Aidan Quigley — author of the CQ Budget newsletter and co-host of the CQ Budget podcast — for a Fall 2026 Legislative Preview. Here's what they had to say, including the full recording and transcript below.
Video Timestamps
- 2:34 — The Senate returns: the crypto market structure bill leads the floor agenda
- 4:17 — Savannah Behrmann on the Clarity Act's new ethics provision and the hunt for 60 votes
- 7:09 — The college sports name, image, and likeness bill and Sen. Ted Cruz's push
- 9:21 — Permitting overhaul: no bill text yet, and Democrats' shrinking incentive to deal
- 12:32 — Aidan Quigley on the early continuing resolution and the state of appropriations
- 13:34 — December flashpoints: the hemp ban and the OMB grant rule
- 15:06 — Defense vs. non-defense: the top-line standoff
- 16:33 — McConnell watch and the farm bill markup
- 23:33 — December 11: a deal, a short extension, or a punt to the new year
- 25:57 — The lame-duck outlook, the "YOLO caucus," and the NDAA
- 29:16 — Election predictions for the House and Senate
Full Transcript
The Senate's September Sprint: Crypto, College Sports, and Permitting
Peter Cohn
Thank you, Anna, so much. And thank you to all our guests — thanks for being with us today. This is our CQ 2026 Fall Legislative Preview. I'm Pete Cohn, managing editor, and joining me to talk about the fall agenda are Savannah Behrmann, who's with me here in the studio — Savannah is our congressional leadership reporter, and basically wherever John Thune is, you're going to see Savannah not far behind. Also joining us is Aidan Quigley, our senior budget reporter, who is the anchor of our flagship CQ Budget newsletter and does a lot of hosting of the CQ Budget podcast, which if you haven't seen, I would check out as well.
So let's dive right in. Savannah, I want to start with you, because the Senate is coming back — the Senate's been gone for a long time now. The House has taken probably a little more time off than the Senate overall, but the Senate is now back for the first time since early August, and the first really big item out of the gate is the crypto market structure bill. Senator Thune, the majority leader, has said he's a little skeptical that it's going to pass, but there have been some developments over the last 24 to 48 hours that could make tomorrow's procedural vote quite interesting. They need to get 60 votes, and no one's quite sure how that's going to go.
The leader has said that if they cannot get onto that bill, they're going to go to the college sports bill — the name, image, and likeness bill — which he thinks has a good chance of passage, although the House has some hang-ups with that version. And then Thune also said, and this was kind of a surprise to a lot of people last week when he was in Dallas, that the permitting overhaul bill — the energy infrastructure permitting bill, a years-long effort that's never been able to go anywhere — has a real chance of happening now.
So, can any or all of those things get done in the current political climate?
Savannah Behrmann
Right — which would be a big surprise, because I think most of us are expecting that Democrats will take back the House, just given the political climate. But I don't think even a few months ago, saying Democrats could take back the Senate would have been something plausible.
And like you started out with, the Clarity Act — this crypto bill that Senator Lummis has been working on — she released last night a new version that has a new ethics provision that would bar public officials from issuing or sponsoring digital assets. This has been really big for Democrats, to clean up some of the language there, as they've been really concerned with President Trump and his family and how much money they've made off some of their digital currencies — I think it's north of $1 billion from last year.
That is an improvement for Democrats, but there are still some sticking points about some of the high-yield interests, banks wanting greater clarity, and competition concerns from some smaller banks as well. So like you noted, tomorrow's vote is going to be a huge test vote on whether they can get 60. But if they do get on that bill, it eats up time from the other two priorities. They could be debating this bill for days, maybe even weeks — and they're only here for a few weeks.
Peter Cohn
That's a really good point, and I want to pick up on that. Tomorrow's vote is a procedural vote — it's cloture on the motion to proceed. As one of our colleagues, Niels Lesniewski, a long-time Senate watcher, always notes, it's not cloture on the bill — this is just a preliminary procedural step, so there's a long way to go. There's speculation the Democrats — they're going to need at least seven, maybe a few more — and you might have a few Republicans concerned about the banks' point of view, that the yield issue is going to take deposits away from traditional deposit accounts.
If they get 60 votes tomorrow, they'll just be on the bill — debating it, let alone any amendments — and then you have to get 60 votes again on cloture. This is the first inning in what could go to extra innings, and Thune has two other things on the agenda.
Savannah Behrmann
Taking it back to the sports references — the name and likeness bill is what he teed up as the second priority after Clarity. If Clarity fails tomorrow, if they even fail to get onto the bill, they might immediately move to it. Because for him, more than anything, he wants to get something on the board before Senate Republicans leave for the midterms. They need some sort of legislative points on the board.
Peter Cohn
Well done, Savannah — I see what you did there. So let's pivot to the name, image, likeness bill. Senator Ted Cruz, chairman of the Commerce Committee, has been really pushing this bill. It's bipartisan, it's got a lot of support, but it's not clear it has 60 votes. Senator Cruz was on ESPN's College GameDay over the weekend, where he was booed vociferously by the crowd — though they might not have been booing the bill he was talking about; that's open to interpretation.
Senator Cruz is doing a big press conference on that bill, and there's a big push right now. It's probably the biggest priority for a lot of the college conferences and the NCAA. Of course, the House has its own bill and some hang-ups over there, and the House only being in town for one week is not going to help get that to the finish line. But if the Senate can pass it, Senator Thune can say: if we can get Clarity done and get NIL done, that's two major bipartisan accomplishments — even one would be major. And a lot of people can relate to the issues they're seeing with college sports right now: all the money, players approaching 30 years old on the field. It's kind of a mess.
Savannah Behrmann
On those two issues in particular, it would be really important for Thune and Senate Republican leadership to pass their versions before they leave town, to add pressure on their House colleagues to pass theirs — because there are differences in the crypto space and in the sports space between the different pieces of legislation. They want to turn up the pressure there as well.
Peter Cohn
Right — it's not like any of these things are slam dunks in the House, even if they get through the Senate. All of these things will likely have to wait, including the permitting bill, which is the next thing — we don't even have text yet. There were a lot of talks during the recess, and they're very positive. The Energy Committee and the Environment and Public Works Committee have been working hard on it, but there's no text, and time is dwindling.
Once these things get to the House, they're probably going to wait until after the election — and I saw on one of the prediction markets an 85 percent chance the House flips to the Democrats. So if you're the Democrats right now, what is your incentive? This really affects the budget process — Aidan, I want to get to you in a minute — but generally, what does this do to your willingness to cut deals before the elections, or even after, if they make the gains that are projected?
Savannah Behrmann
Especially on permitting, I don't see any particular reason why Democrats would be pushing to do this before next Congress — especially if there's a concern the White House isn't going to uphold its end of the deal on some of these renewable energy projects. That's been the big sticking point. Senator Heinrich and Senator Whitehouse had concerns and pulled back from negotiations with the White House last year. Getting a deal on permitting reform is something they've been close to for the last four years, and it continues to get kicked down the road.
So I don't see a politically advantageous reason for them to do this before the election — versus seeing if it swings into their lane, legislating on it, and strong-arming Donald Trump into signing something.
Peter Cohn
That's a pretty good assessment. There's also been a lot of pressure from some of the groups saying, look, now is the time — if you don't get this done now, it's going to have to wait until after the 2028 elections, and by then it'll be too late to deal with the climate. But if you're a hardcore climate activist, you're thinking: do we want to make it easier to build more oil and gas pipelines? How good is the end of the bargain going to be for people actually concerned about the climate crisis? It would certainly help renewable energy projects — solar and wind — but you have the other side of the coin being pushed by the fossil fuel groups.
In any event, Senator Thune laid out an ambitious agenda, and there's talk they might not even be in session for the entire month of September. They may say, look, we've done all we can — let people like Susan Collins, who's got a tough race in Maine, go campaign and get out of Washington.
Savannah Behrmann
And she is one of the incumbents in probably the most purple seat — Republicans have to keep that seat in order to keep the Senate.
Appropriations After the Early CR
Peter Cohn
It'll be interesting to see how long they stick around — this week will be key, and next week. But Aidan, I want to get to you, because you cover the budget closer than anybody on our team. The fact that they got the continuing resolution done and signed into law already — that, to me, was a staggering accomplishment. I wanted to get your take on that achievement and what it portends for when they get back in the fall, because the CR only runs through December 11. They'll be back a week or so after the election, and they really haven't resolved much of anything on appropriations between the two parties. The House has moved its bills through committee, but the Senate is nowhere.
Aidan Quigley
Yeah, exactly. First off, on the CR — it was astonishing to me that they got it done so early. I'm definitely not complaining, but it was really shocking. Both sides wanted to take the shutdown off the table before the election and were able to reach a pretty straightforward agreement.
That said, there are some issues in the CR that will come up in December. One of them is hemp — there's a ban coming, but they punted it through the CR period.
Peter Cohn
It would have taken effect at the beginning of November — now it's going to be when the CR expires, right?
Aidan Quigley
Yeah, and the White House is really pushing for that — but Trump signed the ban into place in the first place, so it's a tricky situation. There are a lot of Republicans who are against the White House on that issue, so that's going to be lingering.
And then there's this OMB grant rule, which we've written a ton about, which would give political appointees more power over how grants get distributed.
Peter Cohn
That one's a big deal. Basically, you're putting the OMB director — or at least his top people — right in charge of the grant-making process to some extent.
Aidan Quigley
The White House really wants it, but it's impossible for me to believe Democrats will vote for any bill that would allow that to happen — and a lot of Republican appropriators are with the Democrats on this. That will be a big fight in December. So those are two issues we're keeping an eye on in particular.
Taking a step back for the wider view: the defense and non-defense spending levels have been a huge point of disagreement. Trump wants $1.5 trillion in defense spending, with about $1.1 trillion of that in discretionary defense. They're really not even close to having a deal. And with Democrats likely taking back the House, as we talked about, the incentive for Democrats to get things done this year is somewhat low — House Democrats will want to be doing other things next year. They have other priorities.
Peter Cohn
Get it off the plate — that's always the counterargument: clean out all of last year's business now, and then you can start fresh in the new year. But those things always work against each other. As far as the numbers go, the House has its numbers — you pointed to the defense number — but as far as we know, the Senate hasn't even made its subcommittee allocations public.
And then you have this issue with Senator McConnell — which, Savannah, I know you may have thoughts on too. If Senator McConnell doesn't come back anytime soon, they can't mark up any of these bills. Maybe they at least release some of them publicly, to provide a negotiating position if they can even get to that stage in the lame-duck session. What are you hearing right now about Senator McConnell and his whereabouts, and how that might be affecting the debate?
McConnell Watch and the Farm Bill
Aidan Quigley
We had been expecting either markups — which would have been partisan, because there's no bipartisan agreement in the Senate — or the bills to be released sometime this month. But as we reported this morning, that seems to no longer be the case. It's now more likely to happen after the election. We're just more in campaign mode right now, and the focus on getting back out there is drawing away from this a little bit.
There are other factors too — Senator McConnell not being around is one. It's possible he returns in the next couple of weeks for a vote or two, but we really have no idea at this moment whether he'll be able to come back or not. He left rehab early in August, sometime during the recess period, and went home. So who knows if he'll be up to coming back to vote. That's big on appropriations if they were to do markups — which, again, we don't think they will before the election — but the farm bill is also something they really need his vote on.
Peter Cohn
Right. And we saw this morning the Senate Agriculture Committee has rescheduled its farm bill markup for this Wednesday. Do you think that's a sign they think McConnell is on his way back to D.C.?
Savannah Behrmann
At some point, maybe. I know it's something leadership has been crossing their fingers about since even before the August recess — and now he's been able to take that month at home, with less pressure about coming back. I think all of us are on McConnell watch, eagerly waiting to see if he'll be there. And as Aidan was saying, his vote is crucial in the Ag Committee — without it, they weren't able to advance the farm bill back in late July.
Peter Cohn
Well, not having Democrats with them on the committee didn't help either.
Aidan Quigley
And on that point — even if they can get it out of committee, they probably won't be able to get cloture and move forward with 60 votes. But it's important to show progress, to show movement. The same would be true if they were to mark up appropriations bills.
Peter Cohn
Right — for Republican leadership right now, they really want to demonstrate they can keep the trains moving on time. Aidan, you follow the approps process very closely — I can't see a scenario where Democrats would be thrilled with a bunch of Susan Collins press releases about all the earmarks she got in these bills, as much as Democrats would like to trumpet their own wins. Maybe I'm reading too much into that, but is some of that politicking one of the reasons the Senate hasn't been able to release the 2027 spending bills?
The Defense Top-Line Standoff
Aidan Quigley
Every election year, you have to be cognizant of the fact that there's an election coming up. But I think the biggest issue here is the Trump defense number and the war in Iran. We haven't had a real top-line fight dominate the summer this way in a while. In past years there's been a spirit of bipartisanship in the Senate — getting bipartisan deals done and having a negotiating position with the House — but this year, the defense number is a really big factor.
Democrats, of course, want more non-defense spending, but then you hit a point where Republicans don't want to propose a giant spending increase — the Ron Johnsons and Rick Scotts of the party would be really upset about that, and House Republicans too. I think spending levels are the heart of the issue, but it's also amendments. Without a bipartisan agreement about what you're bringing forward, you can bring up an amendment that, say, Collins or Murkowski would probably vote for, but then you'd lose all the other Republicans. It's really, really difficult to do markups if you don't have a bipartisan deal in the Senate.
Peter Cohn
Usually what happens is the Senate appropriators make the deal — the defense number comes down, the non-defense number goes up, and they meet closer to the middle. With Republicans in control, Democrats are probably not going to get the parity between defense and non-defense they like to negotiate for, but you get closer. Have we run into a situation where Republicans have said, absolutely not, we cannot go below a certain number on defense — given the war in Iran and the fact that the Pentagon is burning through munitions and has to restock? And Iran is a fraught issue generally with the American public, along with affordability — gasoline and diesel prices. Is it fair to say all of those things are keeping a lid on the appropriations process?
Aidan Quigley
Yeah, I think that's a fair outlook. And in general, we've had quite a few years of pretty flat non-defense spending. We've written about the infrastructure law and how a lot of the funding provided in it is no longer going to be around for this cycle — so there are a lot of pressures on the non-defense side that Democrats want to prioritize. Reaching an agreement that gives the Pentagon a lot more money is just politically hard to imagine for Democrats, especially if they're on the verge of taking back the House — and maybe even the Senate, depending on how the election goes.
It's just not really a climate for a deal right now, in my opinion. Maybe after the election we'll see some movement, once we know how it shook out. But I would bet it's much more likely there's another extension into the new year versus getting deals done.
Peter Cohn
Right — and from a timing standpoint, they only have five or six weeks after the election before December 11, the new deadline. That's just a really tight timeline to get bills done.
Aidan Quigley
It was Murray last week, though, who said, around here, when there's a will, there's a way — you can move pretty quickly if people want to. But it's much more likely, to me, that they punt to sometime early next year and fight these battles then.
Peter Cohn
Neither of you thinks there's a chance they try to extend things by another couple of weeks, closer to Christmas?
Aidan Quigley
Possibly — but they would need a top-line deal within the first two or three weeks after the election, which is a little difficult for me to see. Not impossible, though, if Democrats say, let's wrap this up and start fresh in the new Congress. And DeLauro and Murray, I believe, both want to get this done on the earlier side.
Peter Cohn
Rosa DeLauro, top Democrat on House Appropriations, and Patty Murray, top Democrat on Senate Appropriations — who would become the respective chairs if one or both chambers flip. So maybe they're thinking about the situation like: hmm, we could be writing these bills ourselves.
Surface Transportation and the Lame-Duck Outlook
Peter Cohn
And you bring up a good point about the infrastructure bill — that's another giant piece of legislation hanging out there. The 2021 infrastructure package was the biggest infrastructure spending bill I think we've ever had — over half a trillion dollars above the baseline. What they're talking about now is much more disappointing to a lot of people: all that spending is going away, and they're going back down to a little over inflationary increases.
The House has not been able to pass a bill, the Senate doesn't even have a bill yet, so they stuck a temporary extension onto the CR that expires December 11. We know that one's probably just going to roll over into the new year, barring some kind of miracle deal in the lame duck.
So why don't we end with that discussion. You two have both been around a while covering this stuff. Let's say one or the other chamber flips — how productive is a lame-duck session going to be?
Savannah Behrmann
Oh my goodness. One of the main things I'll be looking at is the "YOLO caucus" — I don't know if they've deemed themselves that; I've been calling them that. Are they even going to show up for some of the votes? And in particular, if some of these people lose their elections, will they continue to show up? That's maybe more of a question in the House than the Senate — but where is the incentive then? I think that could be a big problem for Republican leadership in both chambers.
Aidan Quigley
Unless there's an agreement with Democrats to do appropriations before Christmas — which could happen; I don't think that's an impossible scenario, just less likely than the alternative — I think we'll see a pretty quiet lame duck. I don't think they'll be doing another budget reconciliation bill. I'll very confidently predict that won't happen. There's a scenario in which, if Republicans lose and really want to get more things done, that would be the path to do it — but the math is probably not there.
Peter Cohn
Yeah — the time to do the budget resolution would have been before they left for recess. You've got to go through that whole vote-a-rama process, which is a nightmare for us to cover, let alone for the senators — many of whom are not spring chickens — to stay up all night. It's hard to fathom a vote-a-rama happening in a lame-duck session, but stranger things have happened, I suppose.
Aidan Quigley
And especially with so many Republican senators who are not very thrilled with the White House at this point, to put it lightly — the math for another reconciliation bill does not appear to be there. That's why I don't think the Senate has moved on the budget resolution. They don't have the votes.
NDAA: The Train That Carries the Freight
Peter Cohn
But the Pentagon is running out of money, so something will have to give at some point. And we should mention the NDAA, of course — it's an annual thing. It's happened every year for 60-something years, and it's probably going to happen again. I'd be shocked if they didn't get an NDAA done, even after the election, even with a YOLO caucus maybe not enthusiastic about sticking around. And that train will carry a lot of freight, I would think.
Savannah Behrmann
That's always a Christmas tree people like to stick their ornaments on. I would see the Thom Tillises, the John Cornyns, and the Lisa Murkowskis being friendlier toward tacking things onto the NDAA than having to go through another reconciliation process — especially if Trump tries to push doing the Save America Act through reconciliation, which we all know pretty confidently at this point has no chance of passage.
Peter Cohn
Right — and at least with the NDAA, you've got the 60-vote scenario, so it has to be bipartisan. Some of those members might feel a little better about that, even if they're not coming back to Washington next year.
Election Predictions
Peter Cohn
Well, I guess we should leave on some predictions. We've talked about what the prediction markets and the political handicappers are saying — everybody who claims to know what they're talking about is pretty much guaranteeing a Democratic House victory in November, and people are a little more wishy-washy on the Senate. But we're starting to see poll numbers really move — Alaska could go blue, Texas could go blue. Any last-minute thoughts? Are the prognosticators correct, in your view?
Savannah Behrmann
I don't have a perfect crystal ball, but I do think it's really interesting that Republicans started off with a pretty hefty majority in the Senate — 53 to 47, a pretty good cushion — and the fact that you're even mentioning states like Alaska and Texas. I would throw North Carolina in there, and maybe Ohio as well. It'll make it really interesting to see whether Senate Majority Leader John Thune is majority leader for just this single term, and then back down to the minority or not.
Peter Cohn
Aidan, you want to go there?
Aidan Quigley
Election predictions are not necessarily my forte, but if I had to make one: it seems Democrats are going to take the House, but at this point I'd figure Republicans hold on to the Senate — even if it's 50 votes. We'll see. It's hard to predict, especially from the appropriations watch.
Peter Cohn
Bold call — we won't hold you to it. Though a 50-vote Senate would mean the vice president holding that tie-breaking power. That would be interesting.
All right, everybody — thank you so much for being here for our Fall Legislative Preview: what to watch as Congress returns, what they do and don't do, and the kick to the lame duck. Aidan Quigley, thank you so much for being here — we'll let you get back to your day job. Savannah Behrmann, a pleasure to have you here in studio. We'll see you next time.
Stay Ahead of the Fall Agenda
From the December 11 funding deadline to the NDAA and everything the lame duck may (or may not) deliver, the next few months will move fast — and your organization can't afford to be caught off guard. FiscalNote's policy intelligence suite pairs CQ's award-winning congressional reporting with legislative tracking, stakeholder intelligence, and advocacy tools to keep your team ahead of every deadline. Book a demo today to see it in action.