On Wednesday afternoon, there was a notable display of enthusiasm among House Republicans as they expressed their approval through cheers following the successful nomination of Steve Scalise for the position of speaker at the conference. However, it appears that the rejoicing may have been premature.
The House GOP is experiencing a recurring pattern whereby certain members are abstaining from endorsing Scalise in the crucial floor vote, where he must gather approximately 217 votes (or a similar number, accounting for potential absences) to secure the position.
“Steve Scalise got 113 votes. That is a majority,” Rep. Troy Nehls (R-Texas) stated, then asked, “But how are you going to convince the other 100 and something to all of a sudden just say, ‘Well, now we’re all going to vote for Steve Scalise?’”
The question posed is of considerable significance. Currently, the mathematical situation is unfavorable for a conference that possesses a limited capacity of only four votes, unless they receive assistance from the Democratic party. This is a circumstance that Representative Scalise cannot rely upon with certainty.
Several Republicans are expressing their concerns and indicating their intention to vote for Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), the candidate who secured the second-highest number of votes, or another alternative candidate.
Representatives Lauren Boebert (R-Colo.) and Bob Good (R-Va.) expressed their belief that Scalise represents a continuation of the existing political establishment.
Representative Max Miller (R-Ohio) cited the necessity for new leadership.
Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) raised concerns regarding Scalise’s health.
Representative Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) stated that Scalise has not presented a viable plan for avoiding an omnibus.
Representative Chip Roy (R-Texas) expressed dissatisfaction with Scalise’s efforts to oppose an internal election rules change.
Representative Nancy Mace (R-S.C.) voiced concerns about Scalise’s participation in a meeting of a white supremacist group in 2002.
Representative Carlos Gimenez (R-Fla.) indicated that he will vote for former Speaker Kevin McCarthy unless McCarthy explicitly states otherwise.
Additionally, several other members, including Barry Moore (R-Ala.), Victoria Spartz (R-Ind.), and Nehls, have not provided specific objections.
The current situation is that the House Republican leadership, or at least its remaining components, seem to desire stronger backing prior to presenting the matter on the floor, in order to prevent a recurrence of the 15-vote failure witnessed in January. The House was promptly adjourned by Acting Speaker Pro Tempore Patrick McHenry (R-N.C.) upon the commencement of the session this afternoon.
The endeavor to elect Scalise will now be conducted in a private and discreet manner, reminiscent of the negotiations and political maneuvering that preceded McCarthy’s appointment. However, Scalise and his proponents will not overlook the outcome of that situation, wherein staunch individuals vehemently criticized McCarthy for allegedly failing to uphold undisclosed agreements.
However, abstaining from negotiations is scarcely a viable alternative.
According to Representative Steve Womack (R-Ark.), “The people who are part of Team Scalise — I happen to be one of them — will do whatever it takes, whatever is necessary to get to the individuals who were not on Scalise’s ballot, and convince those individuals that we are going to be much better off when we put this issue behind us.”
The forthcoming course of action entails addressing several objections raised by the Scalise holdouts, some of which may prove challenging to negotiate, such as Greene’s apprehension for his well-being. Scalise is presently engaged in a struggle against hematological malignancy, and he lacks the ability to alter this circumstance in the foreseeable future.
Additional critiques of Scalise, such as his previous involvement in leadership positions, cannot be easily disregarded or absolved. Miller expressed to the press, during an encounter outside the confidential gathering on Wednesday, “trust has been shattered within that room” and it is “the only way in my opinion that you can regain that trust is with a whole new set of people.”
Some individuals exhibit a more cautious approach, exemplified by Roy, who facilitated the agreement that resulted in McCarthy obtaining the position of authority. During the Wednesday afternoon press conference, he explicitly stated his disinterest in discussing any concessions. “I’m not talking about any concessions. I’m trying to figure out the direction of the conference, what it takes for us to be united.”
One factor that is compelling the House to reach a decision is the urgency of legislative matters. An armed conflict has commenced in the nation of Israel. Ukraine is relying on the United States to provide additional assistance. The upcoming deadline for a government shutdown is scheduled for November 17th.
Representative Dusty Johnson, a Republican from South Dakota, expressed to journalists, “We’re in unprecedented times, that’s for sure.”
Early this month an inquiry was directed towards House Judiciary Committee Chair Jim Jordan (R-OH) over his potential inclination towards pursuing the position of House Speaker subsequent to the removal of Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) through a momentous vote.
Jordan has consistently garnered support from House conservatives and holds membership in the Freedom Caucus. However, it is noteworthy that he chose to advocate for McCarthy during the recent vote. In January, he expressed support for McCarthy and delivered a nomination speech in favor of him, even though there were instances where those who opposed McCarthy nominated the individual himself on many occasions.
Due to his widespread support within the Republican conference, he emerged as a prominent candidate for the Speaker role, garnering nominations from several members of Congress as a potential replacement for McCarthy.
The post These 10 Republicans Are Threatening To Derail ‘Status Quo’ appeared first on The Republic Brief.