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.
Click this link for the original source of this article.
Author: James Joyner
This content is courtesy of, and owned and copyrighted by, https://www.outsidethebeltway.com and its author. This content is made available by use of the public RSS feed offered by the host site and is used for educational purposes only. If you are the author or represent the host site and would like this content removed now and in the future, please contact USSANews.com using the email address in the Contact page found in the website menu.