Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
A House Divided
The announcement of Speaker Boehner’s sudden retirement has mostly been met with joy, and I am not sorry to see him go. But we should temper our enthusiasm about how radical a change will come with a new speaker.
The reality of the House, in my opinion, is that it is not made up of two parties. It is made up of three.
Democrats: This is easy. They’re what’s left over after Nancy Pelosi’s Obamacare jihad, which cleansed the House of moderate blue-dog democrats. Their districts are so gerrymandered that there’s little threat of them losing an election, no matter how crazy they are: See Maxine Waters, et al.
Republicans: Nominally the GOP, but in reality the line shifts on every vote. Their districts are not universally conservative, and they tend toward more moderate positions. To retain their seats, they don’t rock the boat.
Freedom Caucus (FC): Formed in January 2015, with Jim Jordan of Ohio as Chairman, these are the GOP’s troublemakers. They come from strong conservative districts, gerrymandered to stay that way. The Freedom Caucus grew out of the Republican Study Committee (RSC), which used to be a conservative voting block. When it became a conservative litmus test, many jumped on board — but they didn’t vote with the RSC, and it became ineffectual.
The total membership of the FC isn’t widely known. I’ve seen figures as low 37 and as high as 40 from credible sources and Wikipedia. For my analysis, I’ll give them 38 reliable members. Your mileage my vary.
The magic number in the House to get anything done is 218, and none of these groups make the hurdle. Republicans are close, and a handful or more defections to the right on certain votes helps to enforce their minority status.
The breakdown is:
This is the landscape Speaker Boehner lived with and the new speaker will inherit.
There’s no majority, and the tendency of the leadership to discount the FC and sometimes berate them makes it hard to create a majority from the right that includes the FC and Republicans.
The FC’s districts are solidly right-wing, and expect their representatives to use every means possible, including the power of the purse and even impeachment, to stop the progressive agenda. FC Representatives who fail to do this may expect a primary threat next cycle.
If the leadership tries to move right, toward the FC, many Republicans will drop off for fear of losing their seats to Democrats in districts they may have won, say, by 50.5%. Left with a minority position, the leadership has to move left — usually pretty far — and pick up Democrat votes to move legislation.
Nancy Pelosi is my pick for most effective legislator of the 21st century to date. She and Steny Hoyer are successful at unifying the Democratic vote on many issues. Thus it becomes a layup for the speaker and his chosen lieutenants and committee chairs to move left, drop the FC and some of the Republicans, and secure a majority sufficient move legislation.
We will have a new speaker soon, but we will not have a new pie chart. The next speaker could be Jim Jordan, but his challenge will no different from Speaker Boehner’s. The reality for a speaker coming from the FC is that in their beliefs about the proper size, scope, and role of the federal government, the Republicans are ideologically closer to Democrats than the FC.
Will things be better in the House? Unlikely, and I personally expect much worse, with the infighting being vicious.
Is there a way forward? The impediment the 114th Congress faces in moving conservative legislation to Obama’s desk, where it may be vetoed, is the Senate. Already, the Washington Times has come out with an article quoting the longest-tenured state Republican chairman calling for McConnell’s resignation.
I love a good revolution and even enjoy a bad one. I am happy to see Boehner go, but he did not go because anyone got a scalp. He got rich and tired, end of story. The landscape for the next speaker doesn’t improve and is precisely why nobody in the House wants the job, and every attempt to overthrow Boehner failed. There was always a group yelling for Boehner’s scalp. But nobody wants to set up shop in the speaker’s teepee.
Published in Elections, General
Congress has a nice webpage detailing where the appropriations measures stand. Here’s next year’s (which aren’t going to happen any time soon.) The House has done some work, but the Senate hasn’t had a final vote on any of the bills. Obama will complete his entire 2 terms without having operated the government on a planned budget. We have essentially entered an era of blank check government.
I know the dangers of a shutdown, but haven’t we gone way, way, way past the danger zone of CRs?
I would love to think that is true, but given the ~85% rate we re-elect incumbents the data is challenged to support that point.
What are you thoughts on the 2016 election in that district?
Please articulate them, because past the NYT and WSJ editorial board rants I haven’t seen objective data that there are many, any? Larry Kudlow argues there are none and while I don’t frequently share his side of the spectrum it is interesting to read his take on the matter.
Because it’s everyone else’s congress critter that is the problem. In the House, those rates are even scarier. (Is it a problem that I have this particular page bookmarked?)
The dangers I see are different than those normally mentioned. A shutdown (which is a complete misnomer) is simply hard work and only for those with spine. Had the Republican controlled House and Senate had some spine and done the work of simply passing the [expletive] appropriations bills (you know, those things they can vote on over the objections of the filibuster) and sent them to Obama then held the line by sending the bills to him again, then there would be no shutdown. We’ve never tested Obama’s resolve like this. At the very most he might veto a couple of bills, but surely he would not veto all 13.
No, the real danger is getting into this process and having Congress back down and demonstrating to the people that they were playing politics instead of standing on principle. That danger is very real and realized far too often over far too many trivial things to risk that kind national public pantsing on something this big. We’d lose not because we’d be blamed for a “shutdown;” we’d lose because House and Senate Republicans would come off looking like petty little men when they caved in.
Very good perspective and the first coherent one I’ve read. Thank you King Prawn.
‘the Republicans are ideologically closer to Democrats than the FC.’ BINGO!
My honest opinion is that McConnell should have been drummed out by June for not having scheduled a single vote on any of the appropriations bills. So much for back to the normal budgeting process. What the [expletive] have these people been doing all year? You had one job, Congress…
Agree. I think Boehner’s departure is a very bad thing for McConnell. The first law of thermodynamics. If the heat is on someone else then it isn’t on you.
The heat used to be on Boehner, now it is exclusively on McConnell in the short-term.
Head of the LA GOP (longest serving state chair and on lots of important things at the national level) is already calling for McConnell to resign because guys like him are screwing up down ticket races already.
Agreed. I’m not even sure there is an identifiable Tea Party. It started out as a protest for fiscal restraint but because it was truly a “ground up” organization it was easy for people in different areas to appoint themselves Tea Party heads and steer it towards various social causes etc… Now it just seems to be a common term for a candidate that is not from the mainstream party.
The Tea Party crashed as soon as someone brought up fiscal restraint in entitlements, you know where the real money is at.
This is the Achilles heel of the movement nationally.
At the state and local levels there are many identifiable Tea Parties, but nationally it doesn’t exist.
Nominally the priority is fiscal restraint, but as King Prawn highlights there are chinks in that armor.
Things might be bad but Boehner was in charge of the body that has actually CUT spending for the first time in any of our lifetimes. We can thank that little 9% for that! I also think that 9% is trending positively in upcoming elections.
I know that here in SW Pennsylvania, once solid blue union thugocracies have disappeared outside of the City of Pittsburgh. The surrounding region has become largely the 9-percenters but with not enough of a margin YET to follow that up with representation along those lines in Harrisburg or DC. You will begin to see a steady trickle of conservatives from this area.
The state R party is still and will probably always be run by the much larger, eastern, Philly suburbs who are much more along the lines of Boehner and the Bushes.
It seems that we don’t need 51%. What we need is the majority of the majority. That is how the progressives have done things. Of course, dominating the definers of “the narrative”, the media, the academy, etc. was half the battle for them. We need to counter there as well.
Federal spending never declined under Boehner. Only discretionary and DOD which is less than half the budget.
I would add Webster-FL, although he is a bit more pragmatic when it comes to voting. He got in trouble for going against the leadership. He is not in a safe district even though he won by 54% (I think) last time. However with the court order on redistricting I don’t know if it will help him or hurt him.
You have a few other like him they are not really part of the FC. There voting record and beliefs are not as conservative. However they have issues with the leadership and want them out. If Alan West had not lost his election he would be another one of those not pure FC party because of not being in a safe district but Caucasus with when it matters.
Sequestration?
Comments and information like this easily make the price of admission at Ricochet worth it.
Yes but since over half the budget is dedicated to three programs and interest, none of which is touchable in American politics (just watch TEA Party support evaporate among the older generations if you touch Medicare or Social Security), the cuts were made where possible. It is already apparent that the only thing that will actually cut entitlements is a massive fiscal crisis.
There could be a Nobel Prize in this comment. Add in conservation then McConnell gets double the heat.
I’m sorry-I can’t agree that Republicans and Democrats are “similarly configured”. The Freedom Caucus hasn’t been given approval to define Conservative principles. Boehner didn’t listen to the Freedom Caucus, and the Freedom Caucus didn’t want to negotiate. As a leader, Boehner should have listened, but the Freedom Caucus frequently acted like spoiled children. They are both to blame.
I think 2/3 are untouchable in the short-term and your Tea Party criticism has merit.
The sequestration is extremely clumsy and really just pissed off everyone. Nancy Pelosi will tell you that is a good thing and she is a legendary legislator.
What would the Nobel Prize be for?
Legitimate government functions are in pincers between spending on entitlements and debt service. We’re moving towards paying only for healthcare/pensions and the borrowing required to support those programs.
The only problem with the Sequester is that it reduced defense by a formula rather than the requirements of our national defense. Our national defense requirements have never worried Pelosi. Why is she a “legendary legislator”? Was this a tongue in cheek comment?
The one thing I’ve learned in my business life is that in a successful negotiation both sides need to leave unhappy about something.
Unfortunately you are correct. Unless we increase the economic growth rate to generate more revenue and reform entitlements, the situation will not improve. Interest rates will be rising as the Fed tries to get back to “normal” which will make the situation worse.
We need to find a way to sustainability that does not rely on the growth genie. Leave growth for paying down debt.