Russell Vought is Trump’s pick to lead the Office of Management and Budget. He’s also one of the architects of Project 2025, a radical plan by Washington’s leading extreme conservatives to dismantle and reshape much of the federal government. One of the most notorious bureaucratic officials from the first Trump term, Vought blocked aid Congress approved for Ukraine and recovery efforts in Puerto Rico after hurricanes Irma and Maria. Vought’s desire for Trump to take greater control of spending from Congress, outlined in a 2021 memo, directly contradicts the U.S. Constitution and other laws.
A Republican aide also told Politico that an effort in the administration’s earliest days to freeze spending for thousands of key government programs “has Russ’s name written all fucking over it.” The order to freeze funds was blocked by a judge, but states have claimed Trump is not abiding by the decision. Additionally, the Elon Musk-led infiltration of several key federal agencies has raised significant concerns about the Trump administration’s efforts to impose spending restrictions by fiat.
To push back, Senate Democrats — many of whom have drawn criticism for being slow-footed and ineffectual in the wake of Trump’s and Musk’s onslaught against the operation of the federal government — burned the midnight oil early Thursday morning by holding the floor for a 30-hour filibuster to protest Vought’s nomination. Gallego and Kelly were among them.
“Russell Vought is a danger to the United States,” Gallego said. “He wants to cut help from the poorest Americans to make sure there is enough money left over to give it to the richest Americans.”
Kelly opened fire on Vought’s attempts to override the spending decisions of Congress and weaken the government’s system of checks and balances.
“This is what an unelected, unaccountable bureaucrat looks like,” Kelly said. “Agree with these programs or disagree with them: Congress — Republicans and Democrats — voted for them.”
While Arizona’s two senators have opposed some of Trump’s most controversial nominees, including Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, Phoenix New Times reported Tuesday that Gallego and Kelly had been in a concerning lockstep with their GOP counterparts during the young legislative session. Gallego had voted with the GOP 80% of the time — on cabinet positions and to approve the problematic Laken Riley Act — while Kelly had done so 70% of the time.
I’m speaking on the Senate floor about why I can’t support someone who wants to break the law, cut support for working Arizonans, and give tax breaks to rich people.
— Senator Mark Kelly (@SenMarkKelly) February 5, 2025
Tune in here: https://t.co/DbTpBkx7aD
New tone?
With Republicans in control of both houses of Congress, those votes are among the few tools Gallego and Kelly have to oppose the agenda of the Trump administration. Instead of deploying the preferred tactic of progressives — to delay and obstruct, in order to slow down the Trump agenda — Gallego and Kelly have mostly operated as if things are normal at the Capitol.At least for Vought’s nomination, that changed.
“We’re supposed to be here to make government work for the American people. I’ll sit down with anyone to make that happen. But the plan seems to be to break the federal government in order to help rich people,” Kelly said. “I can’t get on board with that.”
Gallego also said Vought was “on a crusade to tear down the federal government,” noting that in the past, Vought “showed complete disregard for democratic institutions” and proposed cutting Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security while giving tax cuts to the wealthy.
About to vote no on Vought. Here’s why: pic.twitter.com/XLOtXgnOQY
— Senator Ruben Gallego (@SenRubenGallego) February 6, 2025
“The OMB director must believe in the fundamental mission of the federal government, which is to serve the people,” Gallego said. “Vought, by contrast, has spent his career trying to dismantle government institutions and push an extreme agenda that benefits only a select few.”
Gallego claimed Vought’s policies would undermine national security and erode public confidence in government. He also made a bit of a Freudian slip in line with his near-rubber stamp support for Trump’s picks.
“The Senate and the American people must stand firm against this administration,” he said, before correcting himself to “against this confirmation.”
The difference between opposing a confirmation and opposing the administration is a consequential one. It remains to be seen whether Gallego and Kelly, and Senate Democrats in general, are adopting a more aggressive strategy or whether this was a temporary back-stiffening. Notably, several controversial nominees will soon be voted on in the Senate, including Tulsi Gabbard — whom Kelly has already vocally opposed — and Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
Spokespeople for each senator did not respond to New Times’ question about whether to expect a more combative tone going forward. But there are more Trump nominees due for confirmation votes, so Gallego and Kelly will have to make their perspectives known on a key question: Is it back to business as usual in Washington, D.C., or is the house on fire?
