McCarthy’s opportunity to bring back the ‘People’s House’
Washington Examiner
Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) hopes to be speaker when Republicans return as the House majority in January. And he already has the support of the vast majority of his GOP colleagues, 188 of them. But he needs 30 more to get to the 218 that will overcome Democratic opposition.
Members of the House Freedom Caucus are withholding their support and demanding various procedural changes in exchange for their votes. There is a neat and desirable solution, for many of the Freedom Caucus’s demands would return the House to a better way of operating. Thus, McCarthy can win the backing of his colleagues and, at the same time, seize an historic opportunity to make at least one side of Congress function better.
HOUSE REPUBLICANS AMP UP PRESSURE ON MCCARTHY
The Founding Fathers always intended the House to be the federal institution closest to the people. But for far too long, leaders of both parties have consolidated power in the speaker’s office. Now, McCarthy can make it the “People’s House” again.
The Freedom Caucus identified several changes to both House and Republican Conference rules that would, as they put it, “give all Members the power to fix Washington” and “hold our own party leaders accountable.”
Its most prominent demand is to revive the “Motion to Vacate the Chair,” a procedure that empowers any member to call for a new speaker election. Naturally, leaders don’t like this, but the rule had been in place for more than 200 years before Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) repealed it in 2019. McCarthy can accede to the Freedom Caucus demand on this and show he does not have to resort to Pelosi’s tactics to maintain the confidence of his conference.
Pelosi also eliminated the “Holman Rule,” which empowered members to target programs or federal employees for budget or salary cuts. Considering how much work Republicans have ahead of them in holding the Biden administration accountable, bringing this rule back should be an easy call.
Pelosi’s Democrats also wrote legislation behind closed doors and then forced its passage through the House before anyone had time to read it. The Freedom Caucus is calling for 120 hours between a bill’s introduction and its passage, which could only be overridden by a two-thirds majority. This, too, seems eminently reasonable.
The caucus is also asking that McCarthy agree that he must secure majority support from Republicans before he brings legislation to the floor. That is, caucus members want to prevent the party leadership from striking deals with Democrats contrary to the wishes of most of the members of the party that voters put in place to govern. They also want committee chairmanships decided by a vote of members on each committee, not by the conference Steering Committee, the membership of which is driven by fundraising prowess and loyalty to leadership.
Most importantly, the Freedom Caucus is asking that rank-and-file members get a real voice in the legislative process. No lawmaker from either party has been allowed to offer an amendment in an open process since 2016. That isn’t how the institution is supposed to work, and it should change. The Freedom Caucus’s solution is for McCarthy to promise that any amendment supported by at least 10% of the conference will get a debate and an up-or-down vote on the House floor.
McCarthy does not necessarily have to agree to all these demands. But they are mostly sensible, and many should be considered. The rule guaranteeing floor votes for amendments that meet minimal support requirements is sorely needed.
At the same time, the Freedom Caucus should live by its own principles. Its demand that the majority of the majority be decisive can be applied to the speaker election. McCarthy has the support of the majority of the new House majority. Thus, the 30 holdouts he needs should not stand in the way of his elevation, defying the great bulk of their colleagues and playing into Democratic hands.
The Washington Examiner has argued in recent weeks that Republicans must present themselves during the next two years as a reasonable alternative party of government. The speaker election is an occasion when they can do so. They should be uniting and not tearing the party apart.
McCarthy can agree to many of the holdouts’ demands. He would then get their votes, and he’d improve the functioning of Congress into the bargain. Likewise, the holdouts should compromise. McCarthy isn’t their favorite leader, but he’s the leader their colleagues mostly want. This is where compromise starts. And voters like it.
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER