The People's House Held Hostage, Day 4
A few additional observations about the filibuster-like spectacle over the failure to elect a Speaker of the House. Bright lights, ingrates, and petulance.
Anyone who has studied Congress for any period of history is probably more amused than surprised by the shenanigans we’re witnessing in the US House of Representatives.
We’ve seen worse. At least no one is shooting at Members from the gallery (Puerto Rican nationalists, 1954), threatening each other with fireplace tongs, or engaging in fisticuffs. No terror groups are planting bombs, and ex-Congressmen aren’t being shot and killed by news reporters. All that has happened before. Republican strategist and former Bush 43 White House counselor Karl Rove tells the story of the first brawl to break out on the House floor when Philadelphia’s Congress Hall was its home (the Senate was upstairs) in 1798 (Congress would begin moving to Washington two years later). If you think American politics is confrontational and ugly today, here’s some context.
The seed of the fight was planted weeks earlier when Democratic-Republican Rep. Matthew Lyon of Vermont questioned the Connecticut delegation’s competence and Federalist Rep. Roger Griswold of Connecticut responded by raising Lyon’s dishonorable discharge from the Continental Army. Lyon spit tobacco juice on Griswold, who lunged at Lyon. Other members quickly separated them.
Griswold would have his revenge. On Feb. 15, 1798, he hobbled onto the floor on a hickory cane, accompanied by Virginia Federalist Daniel Morgan, a large man and Revolutionary War hero. Griswold approached his Vermont adversary, whose friends now called him “Spittin’ Lyon,” and began beating Lyon with his cane. Other representatives rushed to stop the assault, but Morgan held them at bay.
The fight was one-sided until Lyon maneuvered to a fireplace, grabbed fire tongs and began returning blows. Members appealed to Speaker Jonathan Dayton, a Federalist, but he was content to watch Griswold make Lyon pay. Colleagues separated the men but they went at each other again, before finally being pulled apart.
A motion to expel the men failed, 21-73. Lyon apologized, claiming he didn’t know the House was in session when he insulted Griswold. Neither man’s career suffered; Griswold served until 1805 and was later Connecticut’s governor. Lyon won another term in the House from Vermont before moving to Kentucky, where he was elected to Congress four times.
There have been a few more physical battles since, usually quickly resolved by the House Sergeant at Arms grabbing the Mace - the House’s symbol of authority - and breaking up any fisticuffs.
I’ve mentioned two previous stalemates over the selection of a House Speaker in American history. Our distinguished 118th Congress blew past the most recent one, but there have been many occasions of multiple ballots for Speaker - second in line to the presidency behind the vice president. Dissension and discord are a feature of American democracy. Thanks to the Capitol Historical Society for this handy chart:
But the shenanigans this week feel different.
First, who knew that the House has its version of a filibuster? The spectacle of five percent of the House - about 10 percent of the House Republican Conference - forcing things to a complete standstill is either a version of “Mr. Smith Goes to Washington” or “Wag the Dog” (a specific reference to US Rep. Matt Gaetz, more about him later).
The story has victims and perpetrators, heroes and villains, and protagonists and antagonists. And a very frustrated “Team McCarthy” is having to deal with multiple rebels among the 20, who are not a cohesive enterprise. They each have reasons for opposing McCarthy; regrettably, some are deeply personal, which is never good or constructive. Personal grievances and pique are a thing in politics as in real life, but they should never be the basis to thwart an entire legislative chamber. The word for that is petulance, among others.
This Spartacus Caucus is turning into a tale of two Members: Chip Roy (R-TX) and Gaetz. There are others, of course, but these two have garnered most of the attention for very different reasons.
I’ve met Rep. Roy, a northern Virginia native representing a fast-growing, GOP-leaning district between the western hills of “keep it weird” Austin and the upscale northern San Antonio suburbs. The deeply principled Roy was the first chief of staff to US Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) a decade ago after a stint on US Sen. John Cornyn's (R-TX) staff and as a federal prosecutor. He won a crowded primary in 2018 to succeed Rep. Lamar Smith (R-TX).
Roy has clarified that his agenda is changing how the House operates and is not personal. He is frustrated by the failure of the House to roll what is supposed to be 12 or 13 separate appropriations bills, considered under “open rules” where any member can offer an amendment, into a monstrous, take-it-or-leave-it “omnibus” or consolidated spending bill. He’s frustrated that Members have less than 72 hours to read legislation sent to the floor. He’s frustrated over bills that cover more than a single topic. He’s tired of the tyrannical style of top-down leadership that symbolized former Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s reign.
He also wants better representation of rank-and-file (read: Freedom Caucus) Members on critical committees, including the House Rules Committee, which serves as the “traffic cop” for legislation on the floor. He wants to democratize the US House and empower members actually to debate and legislate, a trend absent in recent Congresses under both Democrats and Republicans. From the Texas Tribune:
While Roy has been a leader of the movement to block McCarthy, he has differentiated himself from some of his peers like Rep. Lauren Boebert, R-Colo., and Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., who are referred to as the “Never Kevins,” because there is nothing McCarthy could offer them that would cause them to change their vote.
Roy, however, has suggested an openness to supporting McCarthy, as he repeatedly said over the weeks leading up to the speaker’s election that he does not have any personal feuds and is singularly focused on addressing House procedure.
Roy and McCarthy have both indicated for days that they were making progress in their discussions, and many Republicans who support McCarthy expressed agreement for some of Roy’s positions. Although there were numerous accusations of personality politics and cynical self-interest motivating opponents to McCarthy’s speakership, Roy was widely considered to be one of the most likely to sway to McCarthy should his demands be met.
Rep. Ralph Norman, R-South Carolina, told reporters that negotiators had discussed a first draft deal that could be a starting point for a final agreement, but "we've got a ways to go" that could stretch into the weekend.
I am cheering for Rep. Roy. Returning to “regular order” would be welcome reform we all should cheer, Democrat or Republican, conservative or liberal. I don’t know all the details of his prior discussions with McCarthy and his leadership team, but it seems that many of these issues could have been resolved - should have been resolved - before the first vote for Speaker on January 3rd. As someone writes the post-mortem for this historic episode, we’ll probably find plenty of blame on both sides.
Contrast that with others, including Boebert (R-CO), Rep. Bob Good (R-VA), and Gaetz. Aside from moving the goalposts late in the discussions on January 2nd, all three have opposed McCarthy personally and angrily. Gaetz especially has showboated his opposition with ill-advised and unwelcome nominations of US Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH), right after Jordan nominated McCarthy. They’re not alone.
Good’s excuse is politically immature and embarrassing. McCarthy supported the previous GOP incumbent, Denver Riggleman (R-VA), whom Good defeated in 2020. McCarthy, McConnell, and the official campaign committee for House and Senate candidates almost always support incumbents in their elections. When challengers win, they make up and go on. McCarthy’s PAC and the National Republican Congressional Committee have consistently supported Good’s reelections since. That’s some “thank you.” Ingrate.
And then yesterday, Gaetz unseriously nominated Donald Trump. We know why.
It was a fundraising ploy.
While Roy is trying to win significant reforms, including promises for votes on important legislation dealing with the crisis at the southern border and other issues, Gaetz is preening for the cameras and trolling for campaign cash. Those responding to Gaetz’s appeal do little more than prove something PT Barnum never said but is famous for.
It’s hard to tell whether Roy’s efforts alone, which will be successful, will be enough for the Chaos Caucus to grab a lifeline when they see one. Just remember that there are 201 or so Members who are increasingly frustrated by these antics, and making enemies, especially in your caucus, is hardly a formula for future legislative and political success.
One interesting observation I heard from someone I respect yesterday - the diversity and open debate on display is actually helping Republicans, at least politically. At least compared to conformity and uniformity on display by House Democrats. I’m not sure about that, but it’s an interesting observation. Time will tell.
In the meantime, I’ll be cheering for Chip Roy and hoping most of the recalcitrant 20 declare victory and move along. Those with nothing more than personal vendettas against McCarthy should be targets for defeat in GOP primaries in 2024.