MAGA Mike is in a difficult position. As Speaker— not just some yahoo from a backwater district in Louisiana— he has to be seen as trying to not shut down the government even if shutting down the government is what his lord and master insists on. And on the one hand he has the openly anti-American extreme fascists who want to be seen as part of a Shut ‘em Down Caucus but he also has a couple dozen in mainstream districts who have to balance their swing district’s MAGAts with the more mainstream voters who decide elections. So, for example, you have a crackpot like Marjorie Traitor Greene in a Confederate R+22 hellhole on the one hand and Mike Lawler in a D+3 suburban upstate New York district on the other.
And there are a lot more like Traitor Greene in MAGA Mike’s conference than there are like Lawler, although the GOP would have no chance to hold the majority without a significant number of wins in mainstream districts, districts held by Michelle Steel (CA), Don Bacon (NE), Brian Fitzpatrick (PA), Brandon Williams (NY), Tom Kean (NJ), Ken Calvert (CA), David Schweikert (AZ), Anthony D’Esposito (NY), Maria Salazar (FL), Mike Garcia (CA), Lori Chavez-DeRemer (OR), Nick LaLota (NY), David Valadao (CA), John James (MI)… In some cases, the Democrats have already solved the problem for them by nominating unelectable, subpar candidates like John Avlon (NY) and Rudy Salas (CA). But in most of these districts we’re watching a mediocre Democrat battling it again against a mediocre Republican.
Yesterday— pre-debate— Mychael Schnell and Emily Brooks reported that MAGA Mike’s plan to navigate these treacherous shoals look doomed already with “widespread— and growing— Republican opposition, thwarting the top lawmaker’s hopes of the proposal squeezing Democrats in both chambers. At least six GOP lawmakers announced that they will vote against Johnson’s plan— which pairs a 6-month continuing resolution (CR) with a Trump-backed bill requiring proof of citizenship to vote— more than the number needed to tank the effort. If all Democrats vote no, Republicans can only afford to lose four of their members, assuming full attendance.” Actually, three, since Maine's MAGA-Democrat Jared Golden, has announced that he will, again, vote with the GOP on this. (Last cycle, the DCCC and House Majority PAC spent over $8 million to reelect Golden. I expect they will waste as much this year. So far the House Majority PAC has spent around half a million on him.) It wouldn't surprise me if Golden is able to drag two more Blue Dogs in on the GOP side, Don Davis (NC) and Marie Gluesenkamp Perez (WA).
The mounting Republican opposition is putting Johnson in a bind: caught between a restive right-flank pushing for the package that combines the lengthy CR with the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act, moderates concerned about the political implications of a shutdown threat so close to the election, and GOP defense hawks sounding the alarm about how the half-year stopgap would affect Pentagon funding.
Johnson, however, is digging in his heels on the CR-plus-SAVE Act, vowing to plow ahead with the legislation despite the White House promising that President Biden would veto it and Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) planning to bring up an alternative “clean” stopgap.
“There is no fallback position,” Johnson told reporters in the Capitol on Monday. “This is a righteous fight. This is what the American people demand and deserve.”
Opposition, however, is threatening to derail his plans.
The chorus of concerns that emerged publicly on Monday night was headlined by Rep. Mike Rogers (R-AL), the chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, who said he was opposed to the spending plan because of the impact it would have at the Department of Defense.
“Six months are terrible for defense,” Rogers said. Asked if other members of the Armed Services panel would join him in opposition, he responded: “I hope so.”
Republican Reps. Matt Rosendale (MT), Thomas Massie (KY), Cory Mills (FL), Tim Burchett (TN) and Jim Banks (IN) have also publicly said that they will not support the CR-plus-SAVE Act, mounting pressure on Johnson in the government funding negotiations.
“I’m not going to vote to extend bloated spending for six more months and grow the national debt, trillions of dollars more,” said Banks, who is running for Senate. “So it’s an easy no vote for me.”
Some of those Republicans are warning that the opposition is likely to grow. Mills— who called deficit spending “the existential threat” to American democracy and suggested the SAVE Act portion of the package was “messaging at its finest”— said “quite a few” more Republicans are planning to vote no.
Some of that opposition may come from moderate Republicans, who have expressed skepticism about the plan from the beginning. A source familiar with the matter told The Hill that a “handful” of moderates are withholding their votes on the package until they hear what Johnson’s plan B is.
One moderate Republican— who characterized themself as “undecided” or a “lean no”— told The Hill “I’m not comfortable with the plan right now,” while also zeroing in on Johnson not detailing what the backup proposal would be.
…Much of the public opposition, meanwhile, is coming from fiscal hawks who are opposed to extending government funding in general, and are reluctant to change that position for a bill that appears destined to fail.
“I haven’t supported a CR since I arrived here, and I don’t intend to start now,” Rosendale told reporters. “I think it’s a crutch that’s been abused by Congress for many, many years. And they … haven’t completed their work to deliver the 12 appropriations bills, as per the Budget Act of 1974.”
Some of the fiscal hawks are wrestling with their vote.
Rep. Eli Crane (R-AZ) said he was undecided, and that while likes the SAVE Act, he has never voted for a CR. Rep. Keith Self (R-TX) also said he was undecided due to unknowns about the total cost of the stopgap.
The skepticism from the likes of Crane, Rosendale, and Self is notable given they are all members of the House Freedom Caucus, which had put out an official position advocating for a stopgap into 2025 with the SAVE Act attached.
One hope among advocates of the plan was to tee up attacks on Democrats on opposing the non-citizen voting issue. Five [right-of-center] House Democrats voted in favor of the stand-alone House bill earlier this year. Democrats, though, counter that it is already illegal for noncitizens to vote and express worries about the requirements burdening eligible voters.
…Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA), who noted she has never voted for a CR, also said it is “pointless” to vote for the measure without a clear vision of next steps— but that she wanted to talk to Johnson before saying if she would vote yes or no.
“What is Speaker Johnson going to do? Is he willing to fight for this?” Greene said. “And if he’s not willing to fight for it, why? Why would we vote for it?”
UPDATE: The hapless MAGA Mike just pulled the bill.
Comments