Toward a Functional Congress
Democrats are helping the Republican Speaker tame his nihilist wing.
Two reports show the contrasting leadership issues facing the majority and minority parties in the US House of Representatives.
POLITICO (“Greene’s rebellion sparks new talk of consequences for House GOP rebels“):
After Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene’s doomed referendum on Speaker Mike Johnson’s leadership, a growing number of her GOP colleagues are pushing bigger consequences for her and other rebels.
Those Republicans are proposing to build specific punishments into conference rules that would be triggered if hardliners keep breaking ranks against leadership. Sanctions getting floated include arming the entire conference with the ability to force a vote on yanking their committees or even ejecting them from the conference altogether.
The same consequences may also be on the table for Republicans who vote to block GOP bills from even getting to the floor — a once-rare show of discontent that has become increasingly popular on the House’s right flank.
“I wouldn’t be surprised if there are some changes on a couple of committees after watching that motion to table vote,” remarked Rep. Steve Womack (R-Ark.) as he exited the Capitol late Wednesday.
Frustration in the conference’s centrist wing has simmered for months, but it’s boiling over thanks to a growing concern: Greene hasn’t ruled out striking again, keeping alive worries among her colleagues that the Georgia Republican may well take another shot at Johnson.
And, more broadly, GOP lawmakers fret that the House could be stuck in a self-inflicted chaos loop that hobbles them heading into November — unless they course-correct.
“There is an extremely high level of interest, by a high number of members, to change the rules right now,” said Rep. Dusty Johnson (R-S.D.), the chair of the Main Street Caucus.
He added that after Greene’s decision to force a no-confidence vote, he expects renewed GOP conversations about “what rules do we need in place for the House to function, period. … I am interested in anything that would make the House run better.”
WSJ (“Hakeem Jeffries Flexes Power as Mike Johnson Flounders“):
House Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries stepped in to save Speaker Mike Johnson this week after months of patiently taking the pulse of his conference. The question now is whether he would save the Republican chief again—and what he would demand in return.
The unprecedented rescue mission came as the 53-year-old New Yorker is fighting to wrest back control of the House from Republicans this fall and take the gavel for himself. On Wednesday, he sided with Johnson over Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R., Ga.) and her allies, who were angry over how the speaker teamed with Democrats to pass government spending bills and foreign aid to Ukraine.
No one is ruling out a further challenge to Johnson, particularly as another must-pass spending bill—and likely more Republican discord—looms in September. Some Democrats say Jeffries needs to take a hard line if Johnson again needs his help, and how the Democratic leader responds could have broad implications for both the functioning of the House and his own political prospects.
“We need more common sense and less chaos in Washington, D.C., and House Democrats are going to try to govern in a reasonable and responsible and results-oriented fashion,” Jeffries said in a brief interview outside of the Democratic cloakroom. After the vote, he declined to comment on the party’s future plans if Johnson were challenged again by Greene or another dissident Republican.
“Haven’t given it a thought,” he told reporters.
Asked if bringing too much calm to the chamber could backfire in the fall elections, Jeffries said: “If House Democrats continue to get things done and put people over politics, then I’m confident that the American people will vacate the extreme MAGA Republican majority in November.”
Johnson, who has cast GOP victories in the elections as critical to saving the country and called for party unity, acknowledged the crucial role Democrats played in saving him. His majority is razor-thin—217-213—and any single member can call a vote to remove him, a circumstance that also has made Jeffries the most powerful minority leader in memory.
“I think that Democrats believe in the institution and they see exactly what we see and the American people see,” Johnson said Thursday on Fox News. “These are dangerous times. And the country desperately needs a functioning Congress.”
Johnson’s GOP critics have referred sarcastically to Jeffries as the true House speaker rather than Johnson, to point out the GOP leader’s weakness.
The speaker gave the Democrats “everything they wanted, no different from how Hakeem Jeffries would have done,” Greene said Wednesday on the House floor.
Jeffries and Johnson said there were no conditions tied to Democrats’ assistance. Jeffries said he rescued Johnson as appreciation for him allowing a vote on Ukraine aid, a demand of Democrats that was folded into a $95 billion foreign-aid package that passed Congress last month.
While it’s natural to lump the entire Republican caucus together, the fact of the matter is that the hard-core MAGA nuts comprise 39 members in a caucus of 217. And it’s just a handful of the 39 causing most of the trouble.
Yes, most of the GOP caucus espouses policy aims that are distasteful to most of the OTB commentariat. That’s the nature of the American political environment, reinforced by outdated electoral institutions and partisan gerrymandering. But, as noted in my recent post “Congressional Typologies” (based on a detailed study of voting patterns at FiveThirtyEight) there are five distinct factions in the House GOP delegation. All but the 39-member Far-Right Obstructionist wing are interested in legislating.
Speaker Johnson has some extremist policy views and is effectively a Trumper. But, like the rest of the caucus leadership, he’s part of a 55-member Far-Right Establishment wing. One doesn’t have to like his politics—for the most part, I don’t—to acknowledge that he’s actually trying to get things done. (Indeed, to the extent you disagree with their ideology, you should actually prefer the Obstructionist nutters.)
Johnson should absolutely punish Greene and others who are challenging his leadership and obstructing bills that House Republicans overwhelmingly support. Stripping them of their committee assignments is almost a minimum.
Unlike his predecessor, Johnson is accepted by the opposition leadership as an honorable man they can work with. Jeffries is, therefore, doing just that in order to get things done. Despite rather stark differences in domestic policy preferences, both men are institutionalists. They came to Washington to get things done, not simply grandstand. And, like the majority of both party caucuses, they support aiding Ukraine against our Russian enemy.
Both are also being shrewd in messaging their cooperation, in that large swaths of their caucuses dislike helping the other party accomplish anything. Democrats, not unreasonably, think they should get something for bailing out the Republican Speaker from a mess created by his own caucus. But, of course, they’re in fact getting legislation passed that advances their policy aims as far as can reasonably expected given their minority status.
Republican “moderates” sure do love to stand around patting themselves on the back for their cowardice. Don’t forget that every last one of those 178 other conference members voted to let the 39 do this.
@Stormy Dragon:
“Republican “moderates” sure do love to stand around patting themselves on the back for their cowardice.”
Exactly. While the remainder of the Republican caucus may not be nihilists, they are certainly have been willing to give the nihilists free rein when they prevent any legislating from occurring.
Lawler: Roy, Massie should be removed from Rules Committee
It would make me laugh out loud to see my Congressman Chip Roy tossed. The Facebook comments from his far-right fanboys/girls would be glorious.
that goes on
At first blush I took the first part literally, they’d carry guns on the floor to protect against Greene, Gaetz, et al. All things considered, that’s not an unreasonable reading. Are they still allowed to bypass the metal detector?
@Stormy Dragon:
These days, among the GQP, cowardice is the new pink badge of courage.
James, while I think you are woefully optimistic in thinking the problem rests with a mere 39 Republicans, I agree that this is a hopeful sign. Since Gingrich the Republicans have viewed every piece of legislation as nothing more than a means to wage a political war agains the demon Dems. If this finally breaks that rabid fever dream, it is a huge win for the country.
Ha. The GOP caucus has policy aims? I thought that canard went out the window when the GOP caucus killed its own border policy to appease Trump.
The only aim of the GQP caucus is fellating Trump and his deplorables + opposing whatever and whomever Democrats and liberals support. Current Rethuglikkklan “policy” is an accidental downstream side effect of that. This reactionary fake party has for years now declined to adopt an actual policy platform, thanks to the Trump cult.
It’s good Mike Johnson is doing the bare minumum necessary to try preserve Republican election hopes, particularly for his swing dustrict colleagues. But it is only about electoral politics, I do not believe he’s acting out of principle. Delaying Ukraine aid for seven months is not a show of support for Ukraine; he deserves no applause for doing too little, too late.
@DK:
From the OP,
To behave so is a tactical decision by Jeffries and the Ds, not an endorsement of Johnson’s character.
@gVOR10: The fact that a Republican leader appears to have kept his word is a big deal and should be applauded.
In a Rolling Stone item dated November 15, 2023 not yet House Speaker Mike Johnson is quoted saying:
“The only question is: Is God going to allow our nation to enter a time of judgment for our collective sins? … Or is he going to give us one more chance to restore the foundations and return to Him?”
Johnson also said: “The culture is so dark and depraved that it almost seems irredeemable.”
Let’s fast forward six months. Can we assume that God has answered now Speaker Johnson’s plea by the rejection of the dark and depraved Marjorie Taylor Greene’s dismal effort to vacate the Speakers Chair? Is there “one more chance” thanks to God directing House Minority Leader and the Democratic caucus to support Speaker Johnson in an effort to get the United States House of Representatives out of the MAGA mud it has been mired in?
@DK: I think you are overestimating the power that a Speaker has. I think he spent that time negotiating a good deal for the Republicans – getting a lot of concessions on border security and spending – to see it get set on fire by Trump. I think that if he brought up a vote immediately, he would have lost his speakership, and we may or may not have got Ukraine funding.
My take overall is that Johnson wanted to see the Ukraine funding, that he isn’t a Russophile. But he plays his cards honorably, but very close to the vest. Getting protected by the Democrats in a motion to vacate was not really a thing anybody wanted to see, but they were forced into it by Trump. Who is really terrible at legislative politics, since that’s a team sport, and Trump is a narcissist. Trump is good at other aspects of politics, but he sucks at this part of it.
I don’t expect someone like Johnson to advance things I want. I do expect him to negotiate in good faith, keep his word (when he gives it), and move forward when there is common ground.
The situation he is faced with – a bunch of non-team-players on his team – is very, very difficult to deal with. Unfortunately, this isn’t the NBA – he can’t trade them.
I think Johnson is much better for the job and the country than Kevin McCarthy. Of course, I will be even happier when Jeffries becomes Speaker.
@Mister Bluster: That some brilliant red meat from Mike Johnson that you quoted.
I note that it commits him to nothing at all. No legislation is endorsed or condemned. No course of action is charted or refused. This is his game. It’s what he does. He says things that are very colorful and garner lots of attention but actually mean nothing at all about legislation. I’m not sure all his colleagues understand this.
Someone here, I think @becca, described him as a “professional Christian”. Which is very on the nose. I’m not questioning his beliefs, more noting how he uses them publicly.
It was about a month ago where someone wrote this here about Johnson:
There were also allegations about Johnson abandoning the party to side with the deep state.
Yet here is Johnson doing all of those sins and still enjoying the support of Republicans.
Weird huh?
There are two kinds of Republicans – those who will vote to overturn the 2024 election if they lose, and. . . Sorry, it turns out there’s only one kind of Republican.
@Jay L Gischer:
It’s decades since I read Asimov’s Foundation Trilogy and I didn’t watch the recent adaptation. But I recall an episode in the books. IIRC an envoy, a senior diplomat, arrives on Terminus from the Empire. He makes speeches, does negotiations, and attends informal events. Everyone is positive about his visit. Then they run everything he’s said through their semantic analysis computer and discover that when all was said and done, he’d said nothing. Precisely nothing. I remember that episode because I’m so frequently reminded of it.
@gVOR10: This is what I’m riffing off of, from the OP:
Johnson and Republicans strengthened Russian resolve and crippled Ukrainian morale by delaying aid for seven months, allegedly necessary to get something done on border policy. Then they killed a conservative immigration bill endorsed by Border Patrol, to cater to Trump.
Ukraine aid finally passed — without support of a majority of House Republicans — because enough Republicans believed MAGA’s Putin appeasement might cost them seats. I agree with the good doctor that this led to good outcomes, with parliamentary-syle coalition manueuvering. It’s just about the bare minimum needed for self-preservation, not about policy or alleged Republican support of Ukraine.
@Jay L Gischer:
We disagree, of course. I would say you underestimate Johnson’s cynicism, due in part to his innocent-Christian-rube who needed to “pray about it” act.
MAGA killed the border deal months ago. So no, Johnson did not spend the entire delay on policy negotiation. If he was concerned about Ukraine, he could have made a deal with Democrats months ago to get aid done and save his speakership. But the Republican caucus — with commendable exceptions among its foreign policy committee chairs — largely does not care about supporting democracy in Europe.
So Johnson acted only after headlines from Ukraine became dire enough to make Moscow Marjorie and Putin’s appeasers electoral poison. That’s what forced him to finally do what should have and could have been done months ago.
The cowardice of the supposedly non-hardcore Republicans has been a gift to Putin’s dictatorship. If that’s what supporting Ukraine looks like, Ukraine doesn’t need enemies.
@DK: I think the other, very salient, fact about when Ukraine aid passed is that it was well past the point where there could be a primary challenge to members who voted for Ukraine aid.
This is all part of making legislative sausage. You can call it cowardice, or you can call it responsiveness to the demands of the electorate, and the needs of your teammates. I mean, both might be accurate.
@Jay L Gischer:
One may plausibly claim this all signals a sad and alarming new normal. But does what just happened with Ukraine/Israel/Taiwan and the bipartisan border bill represent typical legislative processes? No.
Selling out America and its allies to a murderous Russian dictator is not a normal part of legislative sausage making. Neither is House Republicans being controlled by a twice-impeached former president.
Based on how the sausage usually gets made, the delay in Ukraine aid + Republicans letting Trump kill the border bill were both highly unsual. Because today’s Republican Party is totally off the rails. Mike Johnson should not be normalized simply because he’s marginally less far right than Moscow Marjorie. They both hurt Western democracy in ways without modern precedent. Or, at least since the days of Charles Lindbergh and the America First Hitler-fluffers of 80-90 years ago.
@DK:
On this you and I are in violent agreement. These people are traitors. Traitors to the Constitution, to democracy, to the rule of law, to human rights and to simple human decency. Just because Mike Johnson is merely Mussolini and not Hitler, he’s still, well, Mussolini. There were degrees of Nazi, too, but in the end they were still Nazis and still needed to be destroyed.
It has been hard this last decade for people to remember normal, and to remain faithful to ideals that transcend politics. We need to remember who we are – we’re the people who believe in feeding the hungry, treating the sick, housing the homeless, preserving our world, and defending the rights of those who cannot defend themselves alone. Our ideals sound cliché: truth, justice, charity, human liberty and human responsibility, but we should never be afraid to defend those clichés.
@Michael Reynolds: While I agree with both you and DK to a large extent, I also caution against following the tea-party MAGA logic: the only thing that matters is defying the Bad People (TM). Holding your nose and working with them on any issue invites putrescence of our sacred bodily fluids and cannot be abided.
If you don’t go that route, understanding what motivations and limitations the various members of the opposition have is more useful then endlessly chanting “They are the BAD PEOPLE! They are the BAD PEOPLE!”
Note that I’m not accusing either you or DK of this, but it’s worth pointing out that discussing the various levers you can use to tilt your opponent in one direction or another is not the same thing as praising them.
Let’s hope this is the first sign of the fever breaking. I doubt it will be as sudden and swift as the fall of Tail Gunner Joe’s reign of terror, but that kind of collapse isn’t essential. Lindsey Graham excepted, simply proving that the extremists can be defeated without having to sacrifice one’s career may be all that is necessary for a bit of starch to return to a few spines.
@MarkedMan:
Oh accuse me of it. Like Hitler’s appeasers, Putin’s appeasers are evil. They are not good people.
Praise Mike Johnson or don’t praise Mike johnson: Mike Johnson has not acted as a friend of Ukraine. Y’all are free to believe whatever you want. I still do not believe Mike Johnson cares about Ukraine. I see no evidence for it. Belatedly delaying aid he could have past months ago makes him at worst a collaborator and at best in the neighbor. Either way the outcome is the same. He sold America and its allies down the river. No, that was not part of the normal legislative process.
Democrats having to work with a mealy-mouthed traitor in order to get the bare minimum done for basic government functioning doesn’t make him any less so, nor does it mean Mike Johnson and most House Republicans are suddenly serious, policy-minded patriots.
@Michael Reynolds:
They suck. I think repeating this is useful, because otherwise people start to normalize MAGA’s outrageous, anti-American behavior. This is how the Overton window moves towards fascism. Relative to Moscow Marjorie, Mike Johnson is just fascism-lite. Meh.
I know why Jeffries has to say he’s honorable, but please.
@MarkedMan:
I’ll work with evil people when necessary, I just won’t stop saying they’re evil. We made nice with Stalin in public while in private we were already planning for conflict. I’d put Netanyahu in that same category of people we need to strangle when the time is ripe.
Ukrainians died because Republicans are spineless and treasonous. They disgust me. They did not redeem themselves because they came through with funding, but only after imperiling Ukraine and materially aiding Russia. You’re not a hero when you throw the lifeline too late.
Russia is opening a new front aimed at Kharkiv. That’s on little Mikey and the MAGA goons.