National Review Online
Thursday, January 02, 2025
When the House of Representatives convenes on Friday,
Representative Mike Johnson will face a tricky fight to get reelected as
speaker.
Going into the vote, there are 219 Republicans and 215
Democrats, with Matt Gaetz’s seat currently vacant. Given that all Democrats
are committed to backing Representative Hakeem Jeffries, the most
straightforward route for Johnson to become speaker again would be to get 218
Republican votes. But Representative Thomas Massie (R., Ky.) has already vowed
to vote “no,” meaning that if any other House Republican stands with him,
Johnson would be sunk.
The math could change, depending on whether some members
don’t show up or some choose to vote “present” (a tactic that allowed Kevin
McCarthy to become speaker on the 15th ballot after four days of voting). But
the overall picture is the same: Johnson has very little room for error, and
even the full-throated endorsement offered by Donald Trump may not be enough to
help him clinch the vote.
Emerging from nowhere to the speakership, Johnson has
filled the role ably. He’s a reliable and thoughtful conservative who has
proved a shrewd tactician. Likable and nonthreatening, he will never become a
hate figure like some of his predecessors. He has managed the — for anyone in
his role — all-important relationship with Trump well, given the circumstances.
That said, we agree with some of the conservative
complaints against Johnson. We support a more open and transparent budget
process focused on rooting out wasteful spending as compared with one in which
members are asked to vote on “must pass” end-of-year spending packages that
nobody has had time to read or debate, although the congressional reflex toward
the latter is nothing new. Allowing the most recent so-called continuing
resolution to become a Christmas tree was a mistake, but Johnson adjusted adeptly.
We disagree with some of the other criticisms of the speaker — his support for
continuing aid to Ukraine, for instance, was the right thing to do and entailed
some political risk to himself.
It is also important to view Johnson’s leadership in
context. Trying to lead a fractious caucus with only a few votes to spare is
always going to be a thankless job. It becomes even more difficult to get
anything done when the Senate and White House are controlled by the other
party, as has been the case during Johnson’s tenure.
In the real world, given that there is currently no other
candidate who can garner 218 votes and that the House cannot conduct business
without a speaker in place, the only alternative to Johnson is chaos. When
McCarthy was ousted in October 2023, the House went without a speaker for
nearly three weeks. Back then, it meant the House was neutered in the immediate
aftermath of the October 7 attacks.
This time, a similar period of chaos would mean having no
speaker in place to swear in new members and certify the election for
President-elect Donald Trump. And if things get really crazy, Trump might not
be certified by the time he is set to be sworn in on January 20. (With no
certified vice president or elected speaker, this would mean that the president
pro tempore would have to be sworn in. If you thought Joe Biden was old, get
ready for President Chuck Grassley.)
It would be one thing to argue that weeks of chaos would
be painful but ultimately lead to a better result. But last time, when a small
element of the caucus ousted McCarthy, it ended up with Johnson, who it now
argues is just as bad as McCarthy. It is almost a certainty that if Johnson is
ousted in favor of somebody else, the replacement would end up running the
House in a similar fashion, because the new speaker would be subject to the
same constraints as Johnson and McCarthy were.
If trying the same thing while hoping for a different
result is the definition of insanity, it is time for the insanity to end.
Especially given that Republicans already have a worthy speaker in place.
No comments:
Post a Comment