The current turmoil in the House of Representatives is the culmination of a dispute that has been festering in Congress since the Class of 2010 was elected. That was the year of the “tea party” wave and the backlash against the Affordable Care Act. However, to fully understand it requires a look back to the last Democratic Congressional majority.

The Democrats took control of Congress back in 2006, and took even bigger majorities (and the White House) in 2008. Then, on July 7, 2009, Al Franken was seated in the Senate after an extended post-election legal contest. He became the 60th Democratic vote, creating a rare filibuster-proof majority. This, combined with a large majority in the House and Barack Obama in the White House, made a number of otherwise unlikely left-of-center legislative initiatives suddenly viable.

To understand how unique a circumstance that was, one has only to note that never in American history has the Republican Party had a filibuster-proof Senate majority. The supermajority was mostly theoretical for a time because of the illness of Senator Edward Kennedy (but real when his appointed successor, Paul Kirk, served for fourteen weeks).

The most controversial piece of legislation advanced during this period was the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. The backlash not only ended the Democrats’ Senate supermajority (when Republican Scott Brown won the special election to replace Kennedy), it also produced the largest Republican Congressional majority in many decades. Republicans netted 63 seats, a historic victory by any measure. Many of the members elected that year are organized today, with a few allies, as the “Freedom Caucus.”

Many Republicans ran that year promising to fight the Washington establishment, repeal the Affordable Care Act, reform entitlements, and balance the federal budget. Today, those members and their allies are increasingly frustrated at their inability to accomplish the goals they campaigned on, despite majorities in the House and Senate. They are cognizant of the filibuster and the veto, which stand in their way, but they believe the weapons in their own arsenal should make the contest at least an even match. Many of them are pressing their Senate counterparts to go “nuclear” and eliminate the legislative filibuster, as Senator Reid eliminated it for non-Supreme Court judicial nominees. Above all, they believe Congress has the power of the purse–and they want to use it.

There is nothing disingenuous about the Freedom Caucus. They firmly believe in the power of their ideas and the rectitude of their views. They want Republican leaders who will fight strenuously for those ideas before even contemplating compromise. They believe the fight itself will highlight their issues and educate the public, winning people over in the process. It is for that reason that they are infuriated by legislative chess players who look three steps forward on the board and say, “We can’t make that move; it will put us in checkmate.”

Checkmate, for Members like John Boehner who remember 1995, is a government shutdown. Freedom Caucus Members find that thinking wrong-headed and even cowardly. They dream of Republican leaders who are articulate and courageous enough to fight valiantly and persuasively for conservative ideas, using each showdown as an opportunity to educate and persuade the public.

There is now a profound mistrust between Republican leadership and the Freedom Caucus (and their respective outside allies). The Freedom Caucus’s critics believe a group of 40 or 50 members should not be allowed to be the tail that wags the dog. They are a minority in the Republican Conference and a fairly small minority in the House of Representatives. Many Republican pragmatists believe that Freedom Caucus members (and groups like Heritage Action and the Club for Growth) see political and monetary benefit in promoting themselves as true conservatives at the expense of their colleagues. The Freedom Caucus believes the Leadership pays only lip-service to conservative ideals and is content to lose battles to keep the machinery of power humming.

The pragmatists believe the Freedom Caucus is playing with fire: damaging the party’s brand and endangering the Republicans’ majority. The Freedom Caucus believes the majority isn’t worth keeping if it isn’t going to be used to accomplish the things they came to Washington to do.

The current turmoil in the House Republican Conference is a direct result of these two conflicting worldviews. Speaker Boehner’s retirement announcement seemed, for a few days, to be the culmination of this conflict. Many Republicans hoped that Kevin McCarthy, the cheerful heir apparent, would have a fresh start and find new ways to unite the Republican team. Now, it seems clear that Boehner’s announcement was merely a prologue. Today, it appears there is no willing Republican who can successfully unite the Conference and become Speaker. A cable news commentator said on Thursday that “no sentient mammal” would want the job.

The latest reports are that Republicans’ efforts to draft Paul Ryan may be working. One way or another, there will ultimately be a new Speaker. It appears, however, that long-festering arguments among Republicans will now, at long last, have to be dealt with. That could be a very good thing for the GOP. The jury is still out as to whether it will be.

Print:
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn
Photo of Gabe Neville Gabe Neville

Gabe Neville, a non-lawyer, helps clients navigate the complexities of federal policymaking and proactively engage the legislative and executive branches of government. Using an intimate knowledge of the government gained over thirty years in politics, Gabe helps clients understand policymakers, conservative politics, and…

Gabe Neville, a non-lawyer, helps clients navigate the complexities of federal policymaking and proactively engage the legislative and executive branches of government. Using an intimate knowledge of the government gained over thirty years in politics, Gabe helps clients understand policymakers, conservative politics, and the legislative and regulatory tools available to advance their agendas. He also advises on responding to congressional inquiries and invitations to testify.

Gabe supports clients in sectors as varied as mining, franchising, technology, and life sciences and has substantial experience advising on appropriations, critical minerals, energy, food regulation, health, human rights, intellectual property, labor, social media content moderation, telecommunications, tax, and international trade.

He joined Covington after nearly two decades as a senior congressional staffer and chief of staff to a senior Republican member of the House Energy & Commerce Committee. He previously worked as a Pennsylvania state legislative staffer, Republican campaign professional, and journalist.

Gabe has deep relationships in Republican politics and the conservative movement. As a congressional staffer he frequently chaired meetings of the Values Action Team (VAT) and attended weekly meetings of the Republican Study Committee (RSC). Gabe continues to work with these and other center-right organizations that constitute the base of the Republican Party and frequently drive its priorities.

Gabe was chief of staff to the chairman of the Energy & Commerce Health Subcommittee, which oversees a wide range of government health programs and issues, including public health; hospital construction; mental health and research; biomedical programs and health protection in general, including public and private health insurance; food and drugs; and drug abuse. The subcommittee has jurisdiction over federal agencies responsible for public health programs, regulation, and administration. They include the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the National Institutes of Health (NIH), the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), and others.

At Covington, Gabe has prepared dozens of corporate executives, nonprofit leaders, academics, and nominees for congressional committee hearings. These range from routine policy hearings to high-stakes, high-profile congressional investigations.

He is the author of The Last Men Standing: The 8th Virginia Regiment in the American Revolution and many deeply researched articles on the Revolutionary War and the Founding Era.

Photo of Bill Wichterman Bill Wichterman

Bill Wichterman is a non-lawyer Senior Advisor in Covington’s Public Policy practice.

Prior to joining Covington, Bill served as Special Assistant to President George W. Bush and as the President’s personal liaison to the conservative movement.  Before serving in the White House, he…

Bill Wichterman is a non-lawyer Senior Advisor in Covington’s Public Policy practice.

Prior to joining Covington, Bill served as Special Assistant to President George W. Bush and as the President’s personal liaison to the conservative movement.  Before serving in the White House, he held a number of senior staff-level positions on Capitol Hill, including as Policy Advisor to Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, and Chief of Staff to Congressman Joe Pitts and Congressman Bill Baker.

Bill also has inside experience in congressional and presidential campaigns, including every presidential campaign from 2000 to 2016, usually as a senior advisor. He remains active in national Republican politics.

Bill has more than 35 years of experience in policy-making and is skilled at developing and implementing comprehensive strategies—including the media, opinion-makers, and interest groups—to accomplish the policy goals of his clients. He calls upon his nearly two decades of government service and extensive knowledge of the policy-making and political structures in Washington to counsel Fortune 500 clients in various industries on a wide range of matters related to semiconductor technology, patent policy, trade controls, CFIUS, foreign relations, antitrust, and cybersecurity, among others.