ReportWire

Tag: house speaker

  • Watch: Memorial service honors Rep. Doug LaMalfa in Chico; House speaker, Gov. Newsom are attending

    [ad_1]

    A public memorial service to honor the late Congressman Doug LaMalfa is being held at the Silver Dollar Fairgrounds in Chico on Saturday.Watch the video leading this story for a livestream of the service beginning at noon.House Speaker Mike Johnson and a delegation of members of Congress are among the attendees honoring their Republican colleague. The gathering is also bipartisan with Gov. Gavin Newsom and U.S. Sen. Adam Schiff in attendance.LaMalfa died on Jan. 5 while in surgery at Enloe Hospital following a medical emergency at his home.Memorial Service Updates The memorial began with a color presentation by the Unified Northstate Honor Guard and the singing of the National Anthem by Alexandria Jones.Mark Lavy, a second cousin of LaMalfa, was the first speaker at the service. He recalled LaMalfa’s life story, including how he met his wife Jill, the moment he knew he would be a Republican and key moments in his political career.Other speakers at the memorial include: Speaker Johnson; Ray Sehorn, LaMalfa’s sixth grade teacher; former House Speaker Kevin McCarthy; LaMalfa’s congressional chief of staff Mark Spannagel; Paradise Mayor Mark Spannagel; David Reade, LaMalfa’s former chief of staff in the Assembly; and Assemblymember James Gallagher.LaMalfa’s wife and his children were also set to deliver a family tribute.LaMalfa represented California’s District 1 in Washington for more than a decade and was the chairman of the Congressional Western Caucus. The district includes a large portion of California’s northernmost area, including Oroville, Yuba City, Chico, Redding and the California-Oregon state boundary.As a fourth-generation rice farmer, LaMalfa heavily advocated for his agricultural constituents. The congressman also worked to provide wildfire victims and survivors in his district with relief and recovery efforts and to bolster the state’s water resources.Before being elected to the U.S. House in 2012, LaMalfa served in the California State Assembly and State Senate. Earlier this month, a bill previously championed by LaMalfa advanced in the California Assembly. AB 1091 would allow Californians to purchase eight-character license plates.LaMalfa is survived by Jill, his four children, one grandchild, two sisters and a host of cousins.See more coverage of top California stories here | Download our app | Subscribe to our morning newsletter | Find us on YouTube here and subscribe to our channel

    A public memorial service to honor the late Congressman Doug LaMalfa is being held at the Silver Dollar Fairgrounds in Chico on Saturday.

    Watch the video leading this story for a livestream of the service beginning at noon.

    House Speaker Mike Johnson and a delegation of members of Congress are among the attendees honoring their Republican colleague. The gathering is also bipartisan with Gov. Gavin Newsom and U.S. Sen. Adam Schiff in attendance.

    This content is imported from Twitter.
    You may be able to find the same content in another format, or you may be able to find more information, at their web site.

    LaMalfa died on Jan. 5 while in surgery at Enloe Hospital following a medical emergency at his home.

    Memorial Service Updates

    The memorial began with a color presentation by the Unified Northstate Honor Guard and the singing of the National Anthem by Alexandria Jones.

    Mark Lavy, a second cousin of LaMalfa, was the first speaker at the service. He recalled LaMalfa’s life story, including how he met his wife Jill, the moment he knew he would be a Republican and key moments in his political career.

    Other speakers at the memorial include: Speaker Johnson; Ray Sehorn, LaMalfa’s sixth grade teacher; former House Speaker Kevin McCarthy; LaMalfa’s congressional chief of staff Mark Spannagel; Paradise Mayor Mark Spannagel; David Reade, LaMalfa’s former chief of staff in the Assembly; and Assemblymember James Gallagher.

    LaMalfa’s wife and his children were also set to deliver a family tribute.

    LaMalfa represented California’s District 1 in Washington for more than a decade and was the chairman of the Congressional Western Caucus. The district includes a large portion of California’s northernmost area, including Oroville, Yuba City, Chico, Redding and the California-Oregon state boundary.

    As a fourth-generation rice farmer, LaMalfa heavily advocated for his agricultural constituents. The congressman also worked to provide wildfire victims and survivors in his district with relief and recovery efforts and to bolster the state’s water resources.

    Before being elected to the U.S. House in 2012, LaMalfa served in the California State Assembly and State Senate.

    Earlier this month, a bill previously championed by LaMalfa advanced in the California Assembly. AB 1091 would allow Californians to purchase eight-character license plates.

    LaMalfa is survived by Jill, his four children, one grandchild, two sisters and a host of cousins.

    See more coverage of top California stories here | Download our app | Subscribe to our morning newsletter | Find us on YouTube here and subscribe to our channel

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Daniel Perez rattled Tallahassee. What will he do in year two as House Speaker?

    [ad_1]

    Florida House Speaker Daniel Perez, R-Miami, leaves after speaking with the media during the first day of the legislative session at the Florida State Capitol on Tuesday, March 4, 2025, in Tallahassee, Fla.

    Florida House Speaker Daniel Perez, R-Miami, leaves after speaking with the media during the first day of the legislative session at the Florida State Capitol on Tuesday, March 4, 2025, in Tallahassee, Fla.

    mocner@miamiherald.com

    In his first year as Florida’s young and powerful speaker of the House, Miami Republican Daniel Perez created a new political dynamic in the Sunshine State, in which legislators began to claw back the power they had ceded for so long to Gov. Ron DeSantis and reassert their control over policy and the purse.

    Lawmakers in the Florida House launched explosive inquiries into the DeSantis administration’s spending and decisions. They spearheaded the first ever override of DeSantis’ vetoes. And, working with the Senate, they largely bucked his agenda, letting some of his priorities languish.

    But that was last year. Heading into Perez’s second and final session in charge of Republicans’ agenda in the House, the dynamic has changed, and Perez may be the odd man out.

    Perez, 38, says his relationship with the governor — who he says isn’t returning his calls — remains icy. And he doesn’t seem optimistic about his once-warm relationship with Senate President Ben Albritton following a blowup last year over taxes and spending that appeared to push the leader of the Legislature’s upper chamber closer to the governor.

    With Florida’s legislative session beginning Tuesday, that evolving power dynamic is a wildcard that could affect the state’s ability to lock in more than $100 billion in spending, address the pressing problems facing Floridians and set in stone some of the GOP’s priorities, like drawing new congressional districts and cutting property taxes.

    More than a dozen interviews with Republican members of the Legislature and players in the political process revealed just how fraught the relationship between the House speaker and Senate president remains — though both say they are looking forward.

    “It doesn’t have to be a tough environment,” Perez told the Herald/Times this week in an interview. “It’s just a matter of having a willing and able partner, which, right now, doesn’t seem like something that’s feasible.”

    The governor’s office didn’t respond to a request for comment.

    Florida House Speaker Daniel Perez, R-Miami, hands Florida Senate President Ben Albritton, R-Wauchula, the gavel during the first day of the legislative session at the Florida State Capitol on Tuesday, March 4, 2025, in Tallahassee, Fla.
    Florida House Speaker Daniel Perez, R-Miami, hands Florida Senate President Ben Albritton, R-Wauchula, the gavel during the first day of the legislative session at the Florida State Capitol on Tuesday, March 4, 2025, in Tallahassee, Fla. Photo by Matias J. Ocner mocner@miamiherald.com

    Priorities and Politics

    Just like last year, Perez, a lawyer by trade, is playing his cards close to the vest.

    He has no legacy bill that he is shepherding through the process. He says he believes the state has put the necessary changes in place to fix Florida’s property insurance crisis. And he has resisted calls from cash-strapped condo owners to overhaul the building-safety law he championed after the fall of the Champlain Towers South in Surfside.

    His main goal, he says, is to pass a conservative budget that is smaller than last year’s, potentially setting up another difficult negotiation with the Senate, which is concerned with revenue shortfalls.

    “This will be the first time that there will be a back-to-back cut in the budget coming out of the House since the recession,” Perez said. “And we’re proud to voluntarily take that task on.”

    It’s hard to discern what measures Perez personally wants to pass. He isn’t sharing his preferences. And while he is addressing the governor’s priorities of redistricting and reducing property taxes, both issues have succumbed to the committee process with multiple proposals and much debate.

    “We’re looking forward to that proposal if he were to ever have one,” Perez said of DeSantis’ desire to do away with property taxes for Florida residents with homestead exemptions on their primary residences. “And then I’m sure the Senate will soon thereafter follow his lead, so we’ll have that conversation at the right time.”

    Just a year ago, the House and Senate appeared to be in lockstep, with DeSantis suddenly struggling to bend the Florida Legislature to his will.

    That was clear before Florida’s regular 2025 legislative session. When DeSantis called for a special session on immigration, they called their own and passed legislation that they championed and he panned. Those battle lines appeared to persist when the House and Senate announced a plan for a state budget that would include billions in tax relief.

    “I’m pleased to share with you that we have reached a framework for a budget plan,” Albritton said on the Senate floor on May 2. “As part of our agreement with the House, we will take up the most historic tax relief package in the history of our state.”

    But Albritton says his Senate colleagues balked when it came time to whip votes on Perez’s specific plan to cut $5 billion from Florida’s sales tax as the policy was publicly denounced by the governor. He called Perez several days later and told him the Senate didn’t go for it.

    “I can’t make the Senate do anything,” Albritton told the Herald/Times about the outcome.

    Perez sent out a memo lamenting how the deal had been “blown up,” threatening a government shutdown as lawmakers approached the next fiscal year without a budget.

    “The House and Senate had a deal on the budget,” Rep. Juan Carlos Porras, a Miami Republican, recounted to the Herald/Times this week. “And then over the weekend, the Senate president reneged on that deal, and that resulted in the numerous days that we didn’t have a budget.”

    Ed Hooper, the Senate budget chairman from Clearwater, remembers it differently. The Senate was preparing a state budget for less economic growth in the future as fewer people retire in Florida, he said, and Perez didn’t give them heads up about the House’s planned tax cut.

    “That was a $5 billion surprise,” Hooper said. “There was no deal agreed on a sales tax reduction.”

    The dispute kept lawmakers for months from passing a timely budget, leading ultimately to a deal in June that required two extensions of Florida’s legislative session. In the fallout, the close relationship between Perez and Albritton frayed.

    Albritton told the Herald/Times in an interview on Thursday that he was focused on the future, not the past.

    “I do not have disdain for the speaker,” said Albritton, a Wauchula Republican.

    A policy Albritton cares about will be an early test for that resolve.

    Next week, the Senate will pass the president’s Rural Renaissance package. It is supposed to drive economic growth in sparsely populated regions of the state—an affordability agenda that could be a powerful message during the midterm elections centered on high costs of living.

    Perez killed the bill last year as part of the budget blow up. He’s likely to do it again.

    Herald/Times Tallahassee Bureau reporter Garrett Shanley contributed to this story.

    [ad_2]

    Alexandra Glorioso

    Source link

  • Peña-Melnyk makes history as new Maryland House speaker – WTOP News

    [ad_1]

    Backed by the Democratic Caucus, Del. Joseline Peña-Melnyk’s election follows Adrienne Jones’ resignation and marks a new era of inclusive leadership in Annapolis.

    WTOP’s John Domen reports on Del. Joseline Pena-Melnyk becoming the new speaker of the Maryland House of Delegates

    This article was republished with permission from WTOP’s news partners at Maryland Matters. Sign up for Maryland Matters’ free email subscription today.

    A quick meeting of the House Democrats Tuesday morning cleared the way for Del. Joseline Peña-Melnyk (D-Prince George’s and Anne Arundel) to become the next speaker of the House of Delegates.

    With the support of the Democratic Caucus to lead the chamber, Peña-Melnyk has more than enough votes to win an election for speaker when the House convenes for a special session that begins at noon Tuesday. Her election will make her the first Afro-Latina and first immigrant to preside over either chamber in the Maryland General Assembly.

    “I really don’t have enough words to express how I feel about my colleagues trusting me with this enormous responsibility to lead,” Peña-Melnyk told reporters as she emerged from the 40-minute caucus meeting. “I’m an inclusive leader, and I’m going to lead with my colleagues. This House belongs to all of us.”

    Peña-Melnyk, who serves as chair of the House Health and Government Operations Committee, quickly emerged as the leading candidate just days after former Speaker Adrienne Jones (D-Baltimore County) announced she would relinquish the gavel but remain a member of the House. Jones stepped done Dec. 4.

    Peña-Melnyk’s selection was very different from Jones.

    In 2019, Jones announced then withdrew her candidacy for speaker. She later emerged as a compromise candidate when then Dels. Dereck Davis and Maggie McIntosh were not able to secure enough votes to succeed Michael Busch, who died in office earlier that year. When she took office, Jones became the first woman and the first Black lawmaker to lead either chamber in Maryland.

    Peña-Melnyk was one of four candidates seeking to replace Jones as speaker. She quickly secured enough votes to seal the nomination, and within days the three other candidates for the job said they would withdraw and support Peña-Melnyk.

    The election in the House Democratic Caucus was punctuated with cheers that could be heard in the hall outside the closed door gathering. It was over in less than 20 mins.

    WTOP’s John Domen reports on Del. Joseline Pena-Melnyk becoming the new speaker of the Maryland House of Delegates

    [ad_2]

    Ciara Wells

    Source link

  • House returns, set to end record-breaking government shutdown

    [ad_1]

    Right now the process is underway to reach that final vote in the House to end this longest government shutdown ever. We also wanted to lay out how it’s currently set to work. Over the last 2 days, House lawmakers have been flying in from across the country as they’ve been on recess during the entire shutdown. Some potentially face shutdown-related flight delays, but they are on their way back to the Capitol. The House agenda today was very specific, swearing in *** new congresswoman from Arizona when the House resumed this. Afternoon then debate and an initial procedural vote scheduled for around 5 p.m. Eastern today. If that passes, the House would debate again and is currently scheduled to hold *** final vote around 7 p.m. Eastern. That vote does not include healthcare subsidies, which started the whole shutdown in the first place. Of course we want to reopen the government. But that we need to decisively address the Republican healthcare crisis, and that begins with extending the Affordable Care Act tax credits. We believe the long national nightmare will be over tonight. It was completely and utterly foolish and pointless in the end, as we said all along. Democrats are largely expected to vote no on this. Republicans who hold *** majority in the House can only afford to lose 2 votes in order to pass this bill. And if that happens, the bill then heads over to President Donald Trump for his signature before the very likely long process of getting the government back up and running again. Reporting on Capitol Hill, I’m Amy Lou.

    House returns, set to end record-breaking government shutdown

    House lawmakers reconvened in Washington on Wednesday to vote on a bill that would end the longest government shutdown in U.S. history.

    Updated: 2:05 PM PST Nov 12, 2025

    Editorial Standards

    House lawmakers raced back to Washington on Wednesday to vote on a bill that could end the 43-day government shutdown, making it the longest in U.S. history. Over the last two days, lawmakers have been flying in from across the country, some facing their own potential shutdown-related delays, to get to Wednesday’s expected final vote. The House’s agenda included swearing in a new congresswoman from Arizona, followed by debate and an initial procedural vote scheduled for early evening. If that passes, the House debates again before holding a final vote on the bill, expected around 7 p.m. ET. The bill currently does not include Affordable Care Act subsidies, which started the shutdown in the first place.Democrats, who are largely expected to vote “no” on the bill, expressed disappointment.”Of course, we want to reopen the government, but we need to decisively address the Republican health care crisis,” House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., said. “That begins with extending the Affordable Care Act tax credits.”House Republicans, who hold a majority in the chamber, were largely expected to pass the measure despite Democrats’ objections, but can only afford to lose two votes for the bill to pass. “We believe the long national nightmare will be over tonight,” House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., said. “It was completely and utterly foolish and pointless in the end, as we said all along.”If the bill clears the House, it will require President Donald Trump’s signature before beginning the likely lengthy process of getting the government back up and running again.However, full Republican support is not clear-cut ahead of the final vote. The bill includes a controversial provision that would ban most hemp products in the U.S. Supporters say it would close a dangerous loophole on unregulated products, but others argue it would destroy the hemp industry for many farmers. In the Senate, Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., for example, voted against the bill. Similar action in the House on Wednesday could hold up its passage.Watch the latest coverage on the government shutdown:

    House lawmakers raced back to Washington on Wednesday to vote on a bill that could end the 43-day government shutdown, making it the longest in U.S. history.

    Over the last two days, lawmakers have been flying in from across the country, some facing their own potential shutdown-related delays, to get to Wednesday’s expected final vote.

    The House’s agenda included swearing in a new congresswoman from Arizona, followed by debate and an initial procedural vote scheduled for early evening. If that passes, the House debates again before holding a final vote on the bill, expected around 7 p.m. ET. The bill currently does not include Affordable Care Act subsidies, which started the shutdown in the first place.

    Democrats, who are largely expected to vote “no” on the bill, expressed disappointment.

    “Of course, we want to reopen the government, but we need to decisively address the Republican health care crisis,” House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., said. “That begins with extending the Affordable Care Act tax credits.”

    House Republicans, who hold a majority in the chamber, were largely expected to pass the measure despite Democrats’ objections, but can only afford to lose two votes for the bill to pass.

    “We believe the long national nightmare will be over tonight,” House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., said. “It was completely and utterly foolish and pointless in the end, as we said all along.”

    If the bill clears the House, it will require President Donald Trump’s signature before beginning the likely lengthy process of getting the government back up and running again.

    However, full Republican support is not clear-cut ahead of the final vote. The bill includes a controversial provision that would ban most hemp products in the U.S.

    Supporters say it would close a dangerous loophole on unregulated products, but others argue it would destroy the hemp industry for many farmers.

    In the Senate, Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., for example, voted against the bill. Similar action in the House on Wednesday could hold up its passage.

    Watch the latest coverage on the government shutdown:

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Missed paychecks, federal layoffs: The government shutdown heading into another weekend

    [ad_1]

    The White House has begun laying off federal workers as the government shutdown drags into the weekend, affecting employees at the Department of Health and Human Services and the Department of Education, according to the Office of Management and Budget. Military families could miss their first paycheck next Wednesday if the government does not reopen. Although the Senate is set to return on Tuesday, the President has publicly assured service members that they will receive pay regardless of the shutdown, though it remains unclear how this will be achieved.Rep. Mike Johnson, the House Speaker, says some people will receive partial paychecks while others won’t receive a check at all. “Real people are being hurt. You got 700,000 federal workers that will receive paychecks today, followed by an additional 400,000 workers on 10/14. That’s their last paycheck. That is the last paycheck they’re going to have until the Democrats reopen the government,” Johnson said.The House Speaker has rejected a standalone bill to pay troops during the shutdown, urging Democrats to support his short-term plan to reopen the government. Democrats have repeatedly voted against this measure, demanding health care extensions.Rep. Hakeem Jeffries, the Minority Leader, said, “Extend the Affordable Care Act tax credits, address the Republican health care crisis, reopen the government, pay our troops, pay our hardworking federal employees, and enact a spending agreement that actually makes life better for the American people.”The Agriculture Department has stated that the WIC program, which provides food benefits for women, infants, and children, will continue operating “for the foreseeable future” using tariff revenue to remain functional.PHNjcmlwdCB0eXBlPSJ0ZXh0L2phdmFzY3JpcHQiPiFmdW5jdGlvbigpeyJ1c2Ugc3RyaWN0Ijt3aW5kb3cuYWRkRXZlbnRMaXN0ZW5lcigibWVzc2FnZSIsKGZ1bmN0aW9uKGUpe2lmKHZvaWQgMCE9PWUuZGF0YVsiZGF0YXdyYXBwZXItaGVpZ2h0Il0pe3ZhciB0PWRvY3VtZW50LnF1ZXJ5U2VsZWN0b3JBbGwoImlmcmFtZSIpO2Zvcih2YXIgYSBpbiBlLmRhdGFbImRhdGF3cmFwcGVyLWhlaWdodCJdKWZvcih2YXIgcj0wO3I8dC5sZW5ndGg7cisrKXtpZih0W3JdLmNvbnRlbnRXaW5kb3c9PT1lLnNvdXJjZSl0W3JdLnN0eWxlLmhlaWdodD1lLmRhdGFbImRhdGF3cmFwcGVyLWhlaWdodCJdW2FdKyJweCJ9fX0pKX0oKTs8L3NjcmlwdD4=

    The White House has begun laying off federal workers as the government shutdown drags into the weekend, affecting employees at the Department of Health and Human Services and the Department of Education, according to the Office of Management and Budget.

    Military families could miss their first paycheck next Wednesday if the government does not reopen. Although the Senate is set to return on Tuesday, the President has publicly assured service members that they will receive pay regardless of the shutdown, though it remains unclear how this will be achieved.

    Rep. Mike Johnson, the House Speaker, says some people will receive partial paychecks while others won’t receive a check at all.

    “Real people are being hurt. You got 700,000 federal workers that will receive paychecks today, followed by an additional 400,000 workers on 10/14. That’s their last paycheck. That is the last paycheck they’re going to have until the Democrats reopen the government,” Johnson said.

    The House Speaker has rejected a standalone bill to pay troops during the shutdown, urging Democrats to support his short-term plan to reopen the government. Democrats have repeatedly voted against this measure, demanding health care extensions.

    Rep. Hakeem Jeffries, the Minority Leader, said, “Extend the Affordable Care Act tax credits, address the Republican health care crisis, reopen the government, pay our troops, pay our hardworking federal employees, and enact a spending agreement that actually makes life better for the American people.”

    The Agriculture Department has stated that the WIC program, which provides food benefits for women, infants, and children, will continue operating “for the foreseeable future” using tariff revenue to remain functional.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Missed paychecks, federal layoffs: The government shutdown heading into another weekend

    [ad_1]

    The White House has begun laying off federal workers as the government shutdown drags into the weekend, affecting employees at the Department of Health and Human Services and the Department of Education, according to the Office of Management and Budget. Military families could miss their first paycheck next Wednesday if the government does not reopen. Although the Senate is set to return on Tuesday, the President has publicly assured service members that they will receive pay regardless of the shutdown, though it remains unclear how this will be achieved.Rep. Mike Johnson, the House Speaker, says some people will receive partial paychecks while others won’t receive a check at all. “Real people are being hurt. You got 700,000 federal workers that will receive paychecks today, followed by an additional 400,000 workers on 10/14. That’s their last paycheck. That is the last paycheck they’re going to have until the Democrats reopen the government,” Johnson said.The House Speaker has rejected a standalone bill to pay troops during the shutdown, urging Democrats to support his short-term plan to reopen the government. Democrats have repeatedly voted against this measure, demanding health care extensions.Rep. Hakeem Jeffries, the Minority Leader, said, “Extend the Affordable Care Act tax credits, address the Republican health care crisis, reopen the government, pay our troops, pay our hardworking federal employees, and enact a spending agreement that actually makes life better for the American people.”The Agriculture Department has stated that the WIC program, which provides food benefits for women, infants, and children, will continue operating “for the foreseeable future” using tariff revenue to remain functional.PHNjcmlwdCB0eXBlPSJ0ZXh0L2phdmFzY3JpcHQiPiFmdW5jdGlvbigpeyJ1c2Ugc3RyaWN0Ijt3aW5kb3cuYWRkRXZlbnRMaXN0ZW5lcigibWVzc2FnZSIsKGZ1bmN0aW9uKGUpe2lmKHZvaWQgMCE9PWUuZGF0YVsiZGF0YXdyYXBwZXItaGVpZ2h0Il0pe3ZhciB0PWRvY3VtZW50LnF1ZXJ5U2VsZWN0b3JBbGwoImlmcmFtZSIpO2Zvcih2YXIgYSBpbiBlLmRhdGFbImRhdGF3cmFwcGVyLWhlaWdodCJdKWZvcih2YXIgcj0wO3I8dC5sZW5ndGg7cisrKXtpZih0W3JdLmNvbnRlbnRXaW5kb3c9PT1lLnNvdXJjZSl0W3JdLnN0eWxlLmhlaWdodD1lLmRhdGFbImRhdGF3cmFwcGVyLWhlaWdodCJdW2FdKyJweCJ9fX0pKX0oKTs8L3NjcmlwdD4=

    The White House has begun laying off federal workers as the government shutdown drags into the weekend, affecting employees at the Department of Health and Human Services and the Department of Education, according to the Office of Management and Budget.

    Military families could miss their first paycheck next Wednesday if the government does not reopen. Although the Senate is set to return on Tuesday, the President has publicly assured service members that they will receive pay regardless of the shutdown, though it remains unclear how this will be achieved.

    Rep. Mike Johnson, the House Speaker, says some people will receive partial paychecks while others won’t receive a check at all.

    “Real people are being hurt. You got 700,000 federal workers that will receive paychecks today, followed by an additional 400,000 workers on 10/14. That’s their last paycheck. That is the last paycheck they’re going to have until the Democrats reopen the government,” Johnson said.

    The House Speaker has rejected a standalone bill to pay troops during the shutdown, urging Democrats to support his short-term plan to reopen the government. Democrats have repeatedly voted against this measure, demanding health care extensions.

    Rep. Hakeem Jeffries, the Minority Leader, said, “Extend the Affordable Care Act tax credits, address the Republican health care crisis, reopen the government, pay our troops, pay our hardworking federal employees, and enact a spending agreement that actually makes life better for the American people.”

    The Agriculture Department has stated that the WIC program, which provides food benefits for women, infants, and children, will continue operating “for the foreseeable future” using tariff revenue to remain functional.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Democrat XP Lee wins Minnesota House special election to replace assassinated leader

    [ad_1]

    Democrat Xp Lee won a special election Tuesday to fill the Minnesota House seat of a top Democratic leader who was assassinated.

    Rep. Melissa Hortman, of Brooklyn Park, held the seat until her death in June.

    Lee is a former Brooklyn Park City Council member. He defeated Republican real estate agent Ruth Bittner in the heavily Democratic district.

    Lee’s win restores a 67-67 tie in the House, and it preserves a power-sharing deal that existed for most of the 2025 legislative session, after the 2024 elections cost House Democrats their majority.

    Former House Speaker Hortman brokered that agreement, which ended Democrats’ three-week boycott. Under the deal, she agreed to end her six-year tenure as speaker and let Republican Lisa Demuth take the position. Hortman then took the title speaker emerita. Most legislative committees became evenly split between Republican and Democratic members, with co-chairs from each party.

    The tie in the House meant some level of bipartisan agreement was required to pass anything in this year’s session.

    In an indication of the national interest in the race, Democratic National Committee Chair Ken Martin said Lee’s “commitment to expanding access to education, affordable health care, and good-paying jobs honors the legacy” of Hortman.

    “Across Minnesota, our hearts are still broken by the horrific assassination that stole Melissa and her husband Mark,” Martin, who formerly chaired the state Democratic Party, said in a statement. “Political violence is a scourge that has taken far too many lives. Enough is enough. It must end now. And in every case, each of us has a responsibility to condemn and reject political violence wherever it rears its head.”

    The election to replace Hortman takes place about three months after she and her husband were gunned down in their home by a man impersonating a police officer in Brooklyn Park, a suburb northwest of Minneapolis. Another legislator and his wife also were shot but survived.

    Vance Boelter, 57, faces federal and state murder, attempted murder and other charges in the June 14 attacks.

    Tuesday’s special election also follows another act of political violence, the assassination of conservative activist Charlie Kirk in Utah last Wednesday. The shootings have been a concern among voters in the district — and for both candidates.

    Lee said he wants to calm the “charged atmosphere” in the wake of Kirk’s death.

    Bittner said the violence briefly gave her pause about running for office, but she concluded that “there’s no way to solve this problem if we shrink back in fear.”

    Lee, a former Brooklyn Park City Council member, easily won a three-way Democratic primary in August. Bittner, a real estate agent, was the sole Republican on the primary ballot for the seat in the heavily Democratic district.

    Two more special elections will be held Nov. 4 in a pair of Minnesota Senate districts.

    One is to fill the seat vacated by Democratic Sen. Nicole Mitchell, of the St. Paul suburb of Woodbury. She resigned in July after she was convicted of burglarizing her estranged stepmother’s home. The other is for the seat of Republican Sen. Bruce Anderson, of the Minneapolis exurb of Buffalo, who died in July.

    Given that the districts are heavily Democratic and heavily Republican, respectively, control of the Senate isn’t expected to change. But the Democratic candidate for Mitchell’s seat is state Rep. Amanda Hemmingsen-Jaeger, of Woodbury. If she wins, the governor will have to call another special election to fill her House seat.

    Download the FREE WPXI News app for breaking news alerts.

    Follow Channel 11 News on Facebook and Twitter. | Watch WPXI NOW

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Minnesota House Democrats pick Hortman protégé Rep. Zack Stephenson as new leader

    [ad_1]

    Rep. Zack Stephenson presents a bill that would address compensation for minors appearing in Internet content, to the House Judiciary Finance and Civil Law Committee in 2024. The bill passed and was signed into law. (Photo by Michele Jokinen/Session Daily)

    Minnesota House Democrats picked Rep. Zack Stephenson as their new caucus leader Monday, signaling a desire for continuity after the assassination of their late leader Melissa Hortman in June. 

    Stephenson, who has represented the Coon Rapids area in the House since 2019, was Hortman’s 2004 campaign manager as an inexperienced, early 20s college student. Hortman was a mentor to Stephenson for 20 years, teaching him about campaigning, fundraising and serving a Twin Cities metro swing district. Stephenson was also a good friend of Hortman’s and served as a pallbearer during her funeral.

    In a closed-door meeting, Stephenson garnered votes from the majority of the 66 House Democrats. The circumstances of Hortman’s death made choosing her successor challenging, but multiple contenders campaigned for it, including DFL floor leader Jamie Long and Reps. Tina Liebling, Dave Pinto and Cheryl Youakim.

    “I am honored to have the support of my colleagues to serve as caucus leader,” Stephenson said in a statement released by House DFL Monday. “Speaker Hortman is irreplaceable — as a leader, a strategist, a colleague and a friend. While I’ve been chosen to lead, it will take all of us, working together, to move forward, honor Speaker Hortman’s legacy, and build a Minnesota where everyone can succeed. We are all still grieving, but I am confident we can carry our shared work into the future.”

    Stephenson is likely to follow Hortman’s well-thumbed political playbook: raise money, recruit sound candidates and incessantly knock on doors.

    The House is expected to return to a 67-67 tie between Republicans and Democrats after a Sept. 16 special election to replace Hortman in a solidly blue suburban Brooklyn Park district. Stephenson will need to negotiate with Republicans to pass any legislation, deftly say “no” to unrealistic member demands of his own caucus and raise piles of money to campaign in 2026.

    If House Democrats take back control of the House next year, Stephenson will be a frontrunner for House speaker.

    Rep. Aisha Gomez, the co-chair of the House Taxes Committee and a leader of the left flank of the party, called Stephenson “smart, tough, capable, empathetic,” in a text message to the Reformer. “He studied at (Hortman’s) side and she trusted him completely. He wants to do right by her and by us and the people of our state. Our caucus is united behind him and collectively we have a lot of brilliance and heart to bring to the work ahead of us.”

    Stephenson served as a House Ways and Means committee co-chair this year, putting him at the center of budget negotiations with legislative leaders and Gov. Tim Walz. He’s also compiled a significant legislative resume, including authorship of the House bill legalizing cannabis in 2023 and a bevy of consumer protections enacted when he was chair of the Commerce Committee in 2023-24. 

    Stephenson is also a Hennepin County prosecutor. 

    Stephenson will have to hit the ground running: Walz said he will call a special session on gun control following the Aug. 27 mass shooting at Annunciation Catholic Church, and Stephenson will need to work with House Speaker Lisa Demuth, a Republican, to pass any sort of gun or school safety measures. 

    Hortman and her husband Mark were killed on June 14 in their Brooklyn Park home in a political assassination by a man who was targeting Democratic elected officials and abortion rights advocates, prosecutors say. Sen. John Hoffman and his wife Yvette were severely injured but survived a shooting by the same man, according to charging papers, at their Champlin home on the same night. 

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Johnson faces escalating pressure as House GOP prepares for Epstein vote

    [ad_1]

    On his first full day back in Washington, House Speaker Mike Johnson sat for hours in a closed-door interview with six women who say they were abused by the late Jeffrey Epstein.Johnson’s presence in the room on the first day of a frenetically busy September on Capitol Hill underscores how significant the issue of Epstein’s past crimes has become within the GOP.Within days, House Republicans are expected to take their first major floor votes on forcing President Donald Trump’s administration to release more records related to the case. And Johnson — like his members — is under intense pressure to meet the base’s demands for transparency without going against the wishes of the president, whose inner circle has attempted to quiet this summer’s political firestorm over Epstein.“The fact that Mike Johnson sat there for two and a half hours — we’re serious about this,” House Oversight Chairman James Comer told reporters after leaving the meeting Tuesday. “We’re going to do everything we can to make this right.”Johnson himself told reporters the testimonials he heard were “heartbreaking and infuriating” and said “there were tears in the room. There was outrage.”Five weeks ago, Johnson and his leadership team had hoped that sending lawmakers home early to their districts for their August recess would defuse tension around the issue. But the return of Congress to Washington showed that the pressure on GOP leaders has only continued to build.That pressure on Republicans will dramatically increase on Wednesday, when Rep. Thomas Massie and his Democratic counterpart in the effort, Rep. Ro Khanna of California, will hold a press conference in which some of Epstein’s survivors are expected to speak publicly for the first time.Massie and Khanna are leading a push to force the full House to vote on a resolution that would require Trump’s Justice Department to turn over all documents related to Epstein or his crimes. Under their maneuver, known as a discharge petition, Massie would need just five more Republicans to force the bill to the floor since every Democrat is expected to sign on.So far, two other Republicans have signaled they’ll support it: Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia and Rep. Lauren Boebert of Colorado. Other Republicans who have supported the bill itself — including Reps. Anna Paulina Luna of Florida, Eli Crane of Arizona and Tim Burchett of Tennessee — were either noncommittal or suggested they would not support the discharge petition when asked by CNN on Tuesday.The House Oversight Committee has been leading an investigation into Epstein after some Republicans joined with Democrats to compel a subpoena to the Justice Department for records. The panel on Tuesday night released more than 33,000 pages related to the case – all of the subpoenaed documents the panel had obtained earlier this summer.But the public release of information has not stopped the push for more transparency that has ratcheted up the pressure on Johnson. Massie and Democrats said nearly all of those documents had already been made public as part of various court cases and that it did not alter their push for their own Epstein measure.As part of its investigation, the Oversight Committee hosted a meeting on Tuesday with several survivors who are planning to speak at Wednesday’s press conference. In that closed-door meeting, several of them shared chilling stories of abuse. GOP Rep. Nancy Mace, one of the lawmakers in the room who has spoken out about being raped at age 16, left the meeting in tears.Inside the room, one survivor said the women had been told by Epstein that they were disposable and threatened against coming forward, according to a person in the room who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss a private meeting. The women were told if they went to police that Epstein had powerful friends, that person said.If the bipartisan Epstein resolution does pass the House, its fate is unclear in the Senate. But it would be an extraordinary move by a GOP-controlled Congress to take against a president of its own party.To prevent such an escalation, Johnson and the White House are attempting to sell their GOP members on an alternative path. They have backed a non-binding resolution that encourages the Oversight Committee’s investigation. And Johnson stressed the importance of the work of that panel, in part by sitting in on one of the sessions himself.“I sat by him in our meeting and listened to his compassion for these survivors. I listened to his questions,” Greene said of Johnson as she left the meeting. “I’ve listened to some of his plans that he has going forward. I do think he’s doing a great job there.”Even so, Greene is one of the three Republicans so far willing to buck her leadership on the discharge petition. She said it was nothing against Johnson personally, but that she decided: “I just think we need to do everything we can to bring it out.”Inside the House GOP conference, some Republicans are privately dreading weeks of questions about the Epstein matter and would rather move onto issues like appropriations, tariffs or Russian sanctions, according to multiple lawmakers and senior aides. But many of those GOP lawmakers also realize that there is a small but vocal faction of their party that is deeply invested in getting more answers on Epstein and that they can’t be seen as dropping the issue.Democrats, meanwhile, are accusing Johnson of attempting to stonewall further investigations in Congress.Rep. Melanie Stansbury of New Mexico told reporters after the meeting that Johnson was advocating that the investigation should remain within the Oversight panel — rather than expanding the probe to include more committees.“In the room with six victims of sexual violence by Jeffrey Epstein, it was suggested by Democrats that this be investigated using the full force of every committee here in Congress. And the speaker ended by saying he didn’t think that was necessary. He’d like to just keep it in the Oversight Committee,” Stansbury said. “That is where the speaker actually chose to end this conversation.”Johnson, speaking after the Tuesday meeting, vowed “transparency” in releasing information to the public, and said that Trump shares the same perspective.“That’s his mindset. And he wants the American people to have information so they can draw their own conclusions. I’ve talked with him about this very subject myself.. He also, just as we do, is insistent that we protect the innocent victims, and that’s what this has been about,” he said.

    On his first full day back in Washington, House Speaker Mike Johnson sat for hours in a closed-door interview with six women who say they were abused by the late Jeffrey Epstein.

    Johnson’s presence in the room on the first day of a frenetically busy September on Capitol Hill underscores how significant the issue of Epstein’s past crimes has become within the GOP.

    Within days, House Republicans are expected to take their first major floor votes on forcing President Donald Trump’s administration to release more records related to the case. And Johnson — like his members — is under intense pressure to meet the base’s demands for transparency without going against the wishes of the president, whose inner circle has attempted to quiet this summer’s political firestorm over Epstein.

    “The fact that Mike Johnson sat there for two and a half hours — we’re serious about this,” House Oversight Chairman James Comer told reporters after leaving the meeting Tuesday. “We’re going to do everything we can to make this right.”

    Johnson himself told reporters the testimonials he heard were “heartbreaking and infuriating” and said “there were tears in the room. There was outrage.”

    Five weeks ago, Johnson and his leadership team had hoped that sending lawmakers home early to their districts for their August recess would defuse tension around the issue. But the return of Congress to Washington showed that the pressure on GOP leaders has only continued to build.

    That pressure on Republicans will dramatically increase on Wednesday, when Rep. Thomas Massie and his Democratic counterpart in the effort, Rep. Ro Khanna of California, will hold a press conference in which some of Epstein’s survivors are expected to speak publicly for the first time.

    Massie and Khanna are leading a push to force the full House to vote on a resolution that would require Trump’s Justice Department to turn over all documents related to Epstein or his crimes. Under their maneuver, known as a discharge petition, Massie would need just five more Republicans to force the bill to the floor since every Democrat is expected to sign on.

    So far, two other Republicans have signaled they’ll support it: Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia and Rep. Lauren Boebert of Colorado. Other Republicans who have supported the bill itself — including Reps. Anna Paulina Luna of Florida, Eli Crane of Arizona and Tim Burchett of Tennessee — were either noncommittal or suggested they would not support the discharge petition when asked by CNN on Tuesday.

    The House Oversight Committee has been leading an investigation into Epstein after some Republicans joined with Democrats to compel a subpoena to the Justice Department for records. The panel on Tuesday night released more than 33,000 pages related to the case – all of the subpoenaed documents the panel had obtained earlier this summer.

    But the public release of information has not stopped the push for more transparency that has ratcheted up the pressure on Johnson. Massie and Democrats said nearly all of those documents had already been made public as part of various court cases and that it did not alter their push for their own Epstein measure.

    As part of its investigation, the Oversight Committee hosted a meeting on Tuesday with several survivors who are planning to speak at Wednesday’s press conference. In that closed-door meeting, several of them shared chilling stories of abuse. GOP Rep. Nancy Mace, one of the lawmakers in the room who has spoken out about being raped at age 16, left the meeting in tears.

    Inside the room, one survivor said the women had been told by Epstein that they were disposable and threatened against coming forward, according to a person in the room who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss a private meeting. The women were told if they went to police that Epstein had powerful friends, that person said.

    If the bipartisan Epstein resolution does pass the House, its fate is unclear in the Senate. But it would be an extraordinary move by a GOP-controlled Congress to take against a president of its own party.

    To prevent such an escalation, Johnson and the White House are attempting to sell their GOP members on an alternative path. They have backed a non-binding resolution that encourages the Oversight Committee’s investigation. And Johnson stressed the importance of the work of that panel, in part by sitting in on one of the sessions himself.

    “I sat by him in our meeting and listened to his compassion for these survivors. I listened to his questions,” Greene said of Johnson as she left the meeting. “I’ve listened to some of his plans that he has going forward. I do think he’s doing a great job there.”

    Even so, Greene is one of the three Republicans so far willing to buck her leadership on the discharge petition. She said it was nothing against Johnson personally, but that she decided: “I just think we need to do everything we can to bring it out.”

    Inside the House GOP conference, some Republicans are privately dreading weeks of questions about the Epstein matter and would rather move onto issues like appropriations, tariffs or Russian sanctions, according to multiple lawmakers and senior aides. But many of those GOP lawmakers also realize that there is a small but vocal faction of their party that is deeply invested in getting more answers on Epstein and that they can’t be seen as dropping the issue.

    Democrats, meanwhile, are accusing Johnson of attempting to stonewall further investigations in Congress.

    Rep. Melanie Stansbury of New Mexico told reporters after the meeting that Johnson was advocating that the investigation should remain within the Oversight panel — rather than expanding the probe to include more committees.

    “In the room with six victims of sexual violence by Jeffrey Epstein, it was suggested by Democrats that this be investigated using the full force of every committee here in Congress. And the speaker ended by saying he didn’t think that was necessary. He’d like to just keep it in the Oversight Committee,” Stansbury said. “That is where the speaker actually chose to end this conversation.”

    Johnson, speaking after the Tuesday meeting, vowed “transparency” in releasing information to the public, and said that Trump shares the same perspective.

    “That’s his mindset. And he wants the American people to have information so they can draw their own conclusions. I’ve talked with him about this very subject myself.. He also, just as we do, is insistent that we protect the innocent victims, and that’s what this has been about,” he said.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • What Tom Suozzi’s Win Means for Democrats

    What Tom Suozzi’s Win Means for Democrats

    [ad_1]

    Listen to this article

    Produced by ElevenLabs and NOA, News Over Audio, using AI narration.

    Sign up for The Decision, a newsletter featuring our 2024 election coverage.

    Tom Suozzi’s victory in yesterday’s special House election on Long Island brings Democrats one seat closer to recapturing the majority they lost two years ago. But in the run-up to Election Day, party leaders were leery about making too much of the closely watched contest—win or lose.

    “This is a local race,” House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries told me when I asked what a Suozzi win would say about the Democrats’ chances in November. Jeffries had just finished rallying a crowd of a few hundred health-care workers on the first day of early voting. The Brooklyn Democrat stands to become House speaker if the party can pick up another four seats later this year. His very presence in Suozzi’s district belied his attempt to downplay its significance.

    This was as national as a contest for a single House seat gets. Democrats poured millions of dollars into the compressed campaign brought about by the expulsion in December of Representative George Santos, the Republican who’d won this swing seat after selling voters on an invented life story. The election became a test case for the political salience of the GOP’s attacks on President Joe Biden’s handling of immigration and the influx of migrants over the southern border. Suozzi’s opponent, Mazi Pilip, used nearly all her campaign ads to tie him to Biden’s border policies. Suozzi, meanwhile, took a firmer stance on the border than many Democrats and assailed Mazi for opposing the bipartisan deal that Senate Republicans killed last week.

    Suozzi’s message prevailed, and his victory could offer Democrats, including the beleaguered president, a road map for rebutting Republicans on immigration in battleground states and suburban districts this fall. Notably, Suozzi broke with Democrats who have waved off voter concerns about the border as a GOP-manufactured crisis; he called for higher spending to fortify the border and urged the deportation of migrants accused of assaulting New York City police officers.

    Yesterday’s election drew outsize attention not only because it involved Santos’s old seat, but also because New York’s Third District is one Democrats will need if they want any hope of regaining the House majority. Biden carried the district by eight points in the 2020 election, but Santos won it by seven two years later. With about 93 percent of the votes counted last night, Suozzi was winning by nearly eight points.

    His win narrows a Republican majority in the House, which has already been nearly impossible for Speaker Mike Johnson to govern. In a signal of just how vital the contest was, the House impeached Homeland Security Secretary Alexander Mayorkas by a single vote hours before the New York polls closed. Had Republicans waited even a day longer, Suozzi’s vote might have saved Mayorkas the indignity. (His job is almost certainly safe; the Democratic-led Senate is expected to acquit him.)

    Political prognosticators frequently warn against reading too much into special elections, which usually attract low turnout and have a mixed track record of predicting future contests. And this race was even more special than most: A snowstorm that dampened turnout made drawing national conclusions more difficult. As usual, Democratic voters were more likely than Republicans to vote early or by mail, leaving the GOP reliant on voters braving the weather on Election Day.

    The election pitted two competing dynamics against each other. Democrats have recently overperformed in off-year and special elections across the country, benefiting from a political base of higher-educated, higher-income suburban voters who are more likely to turn out for lower-profile campaigns. But Republicans have bucked that trend on Long Island, capturing virtually all of the area’s congressional seats and local offices since 2020. Central to that comeback has been the resurgence of the Nassau County GOP, which for decades was known as one of the nation’s most formidable political machines. “We took the wind out of their sails for years,” Suozzi told me when I interviewed him recently, “but they’re back to being the strongest Republican machine in New York State.”

    Suozzi has been a fixture in the district for the past three decades. A former Nassau county executive, he held the House seat for three terms before giving it up to mount an unsuccessful bid for governor in 2022. Then came Santos. In Pilip, Republicans picked as their nominee a little-known county legislator who ran a cautious campaign aimed at minimizing mistakes that could cost her votes. She agreed to just one debate a few days before the election, and when the Nassau County Republicans held their biggest rally of the campaign in late January, they scheduled it for a Saturday, when Pilip, who observes the Jewish Sabbath, could not attend.

    Suozzi made himself far more accessible both to reporters and to voters, and he tried to define Pilip from the outset of the race as an extremist who would vote for a national abortion ban. With help from national Democratic campaign committees, Suozzi ran a huge number of negative ads about Pilip. The bombardment demonstrated that he wasn’t taking the race for granted. But it also carried the risk of giving Pilip visibility she wasn’t earning for herself. “She was basically unknown outside of Great Neck, which is a small area,” former Representative Peter King, a Republican who backed Pilip, told me. “Yet he was putting her picture up all over, and her name, And it’s an unusual name, so you remember.”

    The strategy reflected Suozzi’s belief that regaining the seat would be tougher than most political observers assumed. Sure, Biden had carried the district easily in 2020 and voters likely regretted electing a GOP con artist two years later. But Democrats discovered last fall that Santos’s election did not seem to hurt other Republican candidates in local races on Long Island. And they knew that tying Pilip to Donald Trump, who remains popular in many parts of Long Island, would not be a sufficient tactic.

    In the final weeks Suozzi leaned into his record as a bipartisan dealmaker, distancing himself from Biden while touting his work in helping found the Problem Solvers Caucus in the House. Polls had given him a slim but not insurmountable lead. By the time the race was called last night, Suozzi’s initial reaction was simply relief. “Thank God,” he said with a long exhale as he addressed his supporters. Suozzi was speaking for himself after a campaign filled with bitter attacks, but he might as well have been speaking for his party, too.

    [ad_2]

    Russell Berman

    Source link

  • Elise Stefanik’s Trump Audition

    Elise Stefanik’s Trump Audition

    [ad_1]

    Elise Stefanik and I had been speaking for only about a minute when she offered this stark self-assessment: “I have been an exceptional member of Congress.”

    Her confidence reminded me of the many immodest pronouncements of Donald Trump (“I would give myself an A+”), and that’s probably not an accident. Stefanik has been everywhere lately, amassing fans among Trump’s base at a crucial moment—both for the GOP and for her future.

    Stefanik spent October presiding over the leaderless House GOP’s search for a new speaker—a post that Stefanik, the chair of the conference, conspicuously declined to seek for herself. In a congressional hearing last month, she pressed three of America’s most prominent university presidents to say whether they’d allow students to call for Jewish genocide; directly or indirectly, her interrogation brought down two of them. And for the past several weeks, Stefanik has been making an enthusiastic case for Donald Trump’s return to the White House.

    She campaigned with him in New Hampshire last weekend, defending his mental acuity in the face of obvious gaffes (“President Trump has not lost a step,” she insisted) and rejecting a jury’s conclusion that he sexually abused E. Jean Carroll. She parrots his baseless claims that the 2020 election was “rigged” and that the defendants charged with storming the Capitol to keep him in office are “hostages.” After a GOP congressional candidate was caught on tape mildly criticizing Trump, Stefanik publicly withdrew her endorsement. Barely an hour after the networks declared Trump the winner of the Iowa caucus—before Iowans had even finished voting—she issued a statement calling on his remaining opponents to drop out of the race.

    I spoke with Stefanik about her fierce defense of Trump, which has won her praise from the former president. In New Hampshire, he called her “brilliant” and lauded her questioning of the university presidents as “surgical.” (He did, however, butcher her name.) Just about everyone can see that Stefanik has been mounting an elaborate audition. The 39-year-old clearly didn’t pass up a bid for House speaker because she lacks ambition. On the contrary, she seems to have a bigger promotion in mind: not second in line to the presidency, but first. In our conversation, Stefanik didn’t make much effort to dispel the perception that she wants to be Trump’s running mate. “I’d be honored to serve in any capacity in the Trump administration,” she told me, repeating a line she’s used before.

    Her displays of fealty aside, Stefanik has a lot going for her. She has become, without question, the most powerful Republican in New York, where her prodigious fundraising helped give the GOP a majority. Stefanik’s House GOP colleagues say she is extremely smart, and she still draws compliments for her behind-the-scenes role during last fall’s speakership crisis, when she ran a tense and seemingly endless series of closed-door conference meetings. Whether or not her declining to run for speaker was tied to the vice presidency, it was politically shrewd. “It didn’t work out well for most others,” joked Representative Patrick McHenry of North Carolina, who briefly served as acting speaker and similarly turned down a chance to win the job permanently. “She saw the writing on the wall,” a fellow New York Republican, Representative Andrew Garbarino, told me. “She was smart enough to say, ‘I’m not popping my head up only to get it chopped off.’”

    The fervor that Stefanik brings to her Trump defense has made her a favorite for VP among some of his staunchest allies, including Steve Bannon, who remains a force in MAGA world. “She’s a show horse and a workhorse, and that in and of itself is pretty extraordinary in modern American politics,” Bannon told me. “She’s at, if not the top, very close to the top of the list.”

    Stefanik may not be subtle, but she’s made herself relevant in a party still devoted to Trump. Her future success now depends on his—and whether he rewards her loyalty with the prize she so clearly wants.

    Stefanik routinely boasts that she was the first member of Congress to endorse Trump’s reelection. That’s true as far as 2024 goes, but it neatly obscures the fact that she did not back his primary campaign in 2016. Nor did she show much support for Trump’s movement as it took root in the GOP.

    After graduating from Harvard, Stefanik began her political career in the George W. Bush White House and later served as an aide to Paul Ryan during his vice-presidential run. In 2014, at age 30, she was elected to the House—the youngest woman ever elected to Congress at the time—and carved out a reputation as a moderate in both policy and tone. She made an abrupt turn toward Trumpism during the former president’s first impeachment hearings, in 2019, and eagerly backed his reelection the following year. In 2021, she replaced the ousted Trump critic Representative Liz Cheney as conference chair, making her the fourth-ranking Republican in the House.

    Not one for public introspection, Stefanik has never fully explained her transformation into a Trump devotee beyond saying she was impressed by his policies as president. The simplest answer is that she followed the will of her upstate–New York constituents, who came to embrace Trump after favoring Barack Obama in 2008 and 2012. “I reflect, I would say, the voters in my district,” she told me shortly before the 2020 election.

    To say that Stefanik displays the zeal of a convert doesn’t do justice to the phrase. She has become one of Trump’s foremost defenders and enforcers in Congress. At first “it was surprising,” former Representative Adam Kinzinger, a Republican colleague of Stefanik’s for eight years, told me of her Trump pivot. “Now it’s just gross.”

    Kinzinger and Stefanik had both served as leaders of a group of moderate House Republicans, but they took opposite paths during the Trump years. Kinzinger voted to impeach Trump after January 6 and left Congress two years later. “In her core, she’s a deep opportunist and has put her personal ambition over what she knows is good for the country,” Kinzinger said. Although Stefanik has been in Trump’s corner for more than four years now, Kinzinger said she “has ramped up her sycophancy” as the chances of Trump’s renomination—and the possibility of her serving on the national ticket—have come more fully into view.

    Close allies of Stefanik naturally dispute this characterization; they told me that although they think she’d make an excellent vice president, she has not once brought up the topic with them. “He’s going to have great options, but Elise will be at the top of that list,” Majority Leader Steve Scalise told me. When I asked Stefanik whether she was campaigning to be on Trump’s ticket, she replied: “I’m focused on doing my job.”

    Other contenders frequently mentioned as possible Trump running mates include South Dakota Governor Kristi Noem; Arkansas Governor Sarah Huckabee Sanders, who served as one of Trump’s White House press secretaries; Senator Tim Scott of South Carolina; and the businessman Vivek Ramaswamy.

    One senior Republican who is friendly with both Stefanik and Trump lauded her leadership skills and political acumen but doubted that Trump would pick her. “She doesn’t have executive experience,” the Republican told me, speaking on the condition of anonymity to talk candidly about Stefanik’s chances. A Trump-campaign spokesperson did not return a request for comment.

    Even as they praise her, Stefanik allies occasionally describe her in ways that suggest she lacks authenticity. “She’s a highly intelligent, calculated individual,” Chris Tague, a Republican in the New York legislature, told me. Representative Marc Molinaro, a member of New York’s House delegation, described Stefanik as “a calming force” inside a House Republican conference often marred by infighting. When I noted that this characterization seemed to be at odds with her combative style in public, Molinaro explained that Stefanik’s “outward persona” helps her keep the conference from getting out of hand. “We all know Elise. She’s strong. She’s tough,” he said. “She didn’t need to be that person, because we know she can be that person.”

    Still, Kinzinger said, unlike some Republicans in Congress, Stefanik does not speak differently about Trump in private than she does in public. “I got that wink and nod from a lot of people, not from her,” he said. “She’s smart enough to know that if she says something in private, it could get out.”

    Stefanik is also smart enough, Kinzinger told me, to understand that Trump’s claims about the 2020 election, which she now recites, are not true. “She knows the drill,” he said. “She would say exactly what I would say if she had the freedom to do it, but she’s all in.”

    To interview Stefanik is to strike a sort of deal: access in exchange for browbeating. She answered my questions even as she rebuked me for asking about such trifling matters as election denialism and January 6. “Everyday Americans are sick and tired of the biased media, including you, Russell, and the types of questions you’re asking,” Stefanik told me. I started to ask her about her recent appearance on Meet the Press, where she had casually referred to the January 6 defendants as “hostages”—an unsubtle echo of Trump’s language. The comment prompted a predictable round of shocked-but-not-surprised reactions from Democrats and anti-Trump Republicans. A New York Democrat, Representative Dan Goldman, introduced a resolution to censure Stefanik over the remark.

    Even though Stefanik made a show of protesting my line of inquiry, she beat me to the question. I had barely uttered “Meet the Press … ” before she started speaking over me: “I know—you’re so predictable—what you’re going to ask. You’re going to ask about the January 6 hostages.” Bingo. Without missing a beat, Stefanik proceeded to read aloud snippets from New York Times and NPR reports about poor conditions and alleged mistreatment of inmates charged with January 6 crimes. “The American people are smart. They see through this,” she said. “They know that there is a double standard of justice in this country.”

    Stefanik was trying to argue that these news reports justified her use of a term usually reserved for victims of terrorism. The specifics of the reports weren’t really the point. More than anything, she seemed to want to demonstrate that, like Trump, she wouldn’t back down or apologize. She sounded almost cheerful, like a happy warrior for Trump—his pugnacious defender who would engage with the biased mainstream media without giving in to them, without conceding a single premise or hemming and hawing through an interview.

    Stefanik was riding high in MAGA world when we spoke. Her Meet the Press appearance was “a master class,” Bannon told me. In addition to the “hostages” line, she refused to commit to certifying the 2024 election, generating outrage that only added to the performance. “This is what we’re thinking. This is us. This is who we are,” Susan McNeil, a GOP county chair in Stefanik’s district, told me, referring to Stefanik’s comments about certification. “Do I trust this election right now? No.”

    “For her to stand strong and make those statements? Good. You’re not being bullied,” McNeil continued. “You’re not gonna get pressured to cave in to saying something that you’re not ready to dignify with an answer yet.”

    Stefanik has no interest in appearing humble or self-deprecating. When I brought up the Meet the Press interview, she used the same word that Bannon had to describe her performance. “It was a master class in pushing back” against the media, she told me, “and it has been widely hailed.”

    Cooperating with this story, like appearing on the D.C. establishment’s favorite talk show, seemed to be part of Stefanik’s unofficial, unacknowledged audition for VP. It was a low-risk bet. A positive portrayal might impress the media-conscious Trump. If, on the other hand, she didn’t like how the piece turned out, she could hold it up to Trump supporters as confirmation that the press has it out for them. Stefanik’s team lined up nearly a dozen local and national validators to speak with me, including Bannon, Scalise, and Representative James Comer, who heads the committee leading the Biden-impeachment inquiry.

    Trump clearly prizes loyalty above just about anything else. Mike Pence displayed that quality in spades, until suddenly, at the most climactic moment of Trump’s presidency, he did not. To test whether Stefanik’s allegiance had a limit, I asked whether a Trump conviction for any of the crimes with which he’s been charged would affect her support in any way. “No,” she replied without hesitation. “It’s a witch hunt by the Department of Justice. I believe Joe Biden is the most corrupt president not just in modern history, but in the history of our country.”

    Stefanik was more circumspect when I asked her what she would have done differently from Pence had she been responsible, as vice president, for presiding over the certification of Electoral College ballots on January 6. Trump had pressured Pence to throw out ballots from states where he was contesting the vote. Pence had refused. Given Stefanik’s apparent interest in Pence’s old job, it seemed relevant.

    At first, she dodged the question by claiming that the election was rigged and referring to a speech she delivered on the House floor in the early hours of January 7, when she voted against certifying Biden’s victory in Pennsylvania. But that speech was worded far more carefully than the outright claims of fraud that Stefanik makes today. Back then, she couched her objections as representing the views of her “concerned” constituents. She didn’t say the election was stolen, nor did she say what action Pence should have taken.

    When I pressed her on Pence’s decision not to intervene and what she would have done, Stefanik replied simply, “I disagreed, and I believe it was an unconstitutional election.” She would go no further than that.

    At some point over the next several months, Stefanik’s dual roles as Trump booster and protector of the vanishing House majority could come into conflict. She has made clear that she wants Republicans to unify around Trump, and sooner rather than later. Control of the House, however, might well be determined in her deep-blue state, where the nation’s most vulnerable Republicans represent districts that Trump lost in 2020. Embracing Trump this fall could cost some of them their seats.

    Now the longest-serving Republican in the New York delegation, Stefanik serves as a mentor for several of the state’s more recent arrivals to the House. She has helped get them seats on desired committees, and, during the speaker battle in October, she arranged for the various candidates to sit for interviews with the delegation. But Stefanik has also worked to keep them in line.

    “She’s not afraid to be blunt,” Garbarino said, recalling times when Stefanik chastised him for a public statement she didn’t like. Her message? “We don’t have to do everything publicly,” Garbarino said. “Sometimes it’s better if you say this stuff behind the scenes to somebody instead of smacking them in the face publicly about it.”

    Stefanik has taken the lead in fighting Democratic attempts to gerrymander New York in their favor, part of an effort to reclaim the House majority. (A recent state-court ruling didn’t help her cause.) To that end, she is working to ensure that none of the state’s GOP House members tries to save their own seat at the party’s expense or says anything in public that could undermine a potential Republican legal challenge. “She’s cracking the whip,” one Republican strategist in the state told me, speaking on the condition of anonymity.

    Stefanik’s toughest task, though, might be getting her colleagues to support Trump. Two swing-district Republicans in New York, Representatives Nick LaLota and Brandon Williams, have endorsed Trump as he easily captured the first two primary states. But others in the delegation have yet to heed Stefanik’s call. In interviews, a few of them seemed hesitant even to utter his name. “I have avoided presidential politics, and Elise has always respected that,” Molinaro told me. As for Trump, he would say only, “I intend to support the presidential nominee.”

    Garbarino used almost exactly the same words when I asked about the presidential race. Two other New York Republicans in districts that Biden won, Representatives Mike Lawler and Anthony D’Esposito, declined interview requests. When I asked Stefanik if they would back Trump, she offered a guarantee: “They’re going to support President Trump, who will be the nominee, as Republicans will across the country.”

    Privately, Stefanik has delivered an additional message to vulnerable Republicans in New York, according to several people I spoke with. “Stefanik has been very clear to not attack President Trump,” the GOP strategist said. “Everyone knows that in New York.” As Stefanik sees it, criticizing Trump would hurt even swing-district Republicans, because the MAGA base is now a sizable constituency in districts that Biden carried. Still, other House leaders haven’t exerted nearly as much public pressure on rank-and-file Republicans. “We all each individually take different approaches to growing our majority,” Scalise told me. “I don’t tell anybody how to manage their politics back home.”

    As Stefanik’s profile has grown, and as her rhetoric has become even Trumpier, Democrats have sought to turn her into a political liability for swing-district Republicans, just as they have the former president. After Stefanik’s “hostages” comment, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, who also hails from New York, said that Stefanik “should be ashamed of herself.”

    But then he pivoted to a political angle. “The real question,” Jeffries told reporters, “is why haven’t House Republicans in New York, like Mike Lawler or others, denounced Elise Stefanik, and why do they continue to rely on her fundraising support in order to try to fool the voters in New York and pretend like they believe in moderation?” None of the New York Republicans took the bait, choosing to remain silent rather than cross Stefanik. (“I didn’t see the clip,” Garbarino told me, in one characteristic dodge.)

    Stefanik clearly welcomes these attacks. In the MAGA world she now inhabits, enraging Democrats is the coin of the realm. Taking their fire only pushes her closer to the place she really wants to be: at Trump’s side.

    [ad_2]

    Russell Berman

    Source link

  • The House Republicans Who Have Had Enough

    The House Republicans Who Have Had Enough

    [ad_1]

    House Republicans didn’t exactly have a banner year in 2023. They made history for all the wrong reasons. Last January, they presided over the most protracted election for speaker in a century, and nine months later, for good measure, lawmakers ejected their leader, Kevin McCarthy, for the first time ever. Last month, the House expelled one of its own, George Santos, for only the sixth time.

    The rest of the year wasn’t any more productive. Thanks in part to Republican discord, the House passed fewer bills that became laws than any other year in decades. And for the few important measures that did pass, GOP leaders had to rely on Democrats to bail them out.

    Republican lawmakers have responded by quitting in droves. After the House spent much of October fighting over whom to elect as speaker, November saw more retirement announcements than any single month in more than a decade. Some members aren’t even waiting for their term to end. McCarthy resigned last week, depriving the party that fired him of both his experience and, more crucially, his vote. Representative Bill Johnson of Ohio, a Republican, and Brian Higgins of New York, a Democrat, are each leaving for new jobs in the next several weeks. (Santos would have stuck around, but his colleagues had other ideas.)

    A roughly equal number of members from each party plan to forgo reelection this year. But the most powerful departing lawmakers are Republicans: The chair of the House Appropriations Committee, Representative Kay Granger of Texas, is leaving after a quarter century in Congress, and the head of the Financial Services Committee, Representative Patrick McHenry of North Carolina, will end his 20-year House career next year.

    Still, some Republicans are leaving after just a few years in Congress, including Representatives Victoria Spartz of Indiana and Debbie Lesko of Arizona, both former state legislators. For them, serving in Congress simply isn’t all it’s cracked up to be—not when your party can’t seem to figure out how to govern. “People don’t engage with each other,” Lesko told me. “They just make speeches.”

    Here are the stories of four Republicans who are calling it quits at different stages of their career: McHenry, a onetime rabble-rouser who became a party insider; Brad Wenstrup, an Army podiatrist whose House tenure spanned from the Tea Party to Donald Trump; Spartz, a conservative with an impulsive streak; and Lesko, a Trump loyalist who never quite found her way in Washington. Taken together, their departures reflect the rising frustrations within a Republican Party that has floundered in the year since it assumed power in the House—a year in which it has spent more time fighting than governing.

    Debbie Lesko

    On October 17, after House Republicans had just tanked their third choice for speaker, Representative Debbie Lesko finally decided she’d had enough: She wouldn’t be seeking reelection. The 65-year-old grandmother of five had been planning to stay for one more term, but the ouster of Kevin McCarthy and the weeks of chaos that followed changed her mind. “It kind of put me over the top,” Lesko told me.

    Lesko had higher hopes for Congress back in 2018, when she won a special election to represent a safely Republican seat north of Phoenix. “Perhaps I was naive,” she conceded. Lesko prioritized border security during her first campaign and managed to get one border-related bill signed into law while Trump was president and Republicans controlled the House in 2018, but her legislative goals have fallen short since then. In the Arizona state legislature, she had served in the leadership and chaired two powerful committees. “I was used to getting things done in a bipartisan fashion,” Lesko said. The House proved to be far more difficult terrain. As a Trump ally, Lesko found few willing Democratic partners after the GOP lost control first of the House majority in 2018 and then of the presidency in 2020.

    In Arizona, Lesko said, lawmakers actually debated bills and amendments on the floor of the House and Senate; in Washington, by contrast, members just deliver speeches written for them by their young staff. “We don’t listen to each other,” Lesko lamented. “We just go in and read a statement.” She bemoaned the “lack of civility” and the hurling of personal insults between members in both parties. (When I asked if Trump had contributed to the incivility, she said, “I would prefer he not attack people personally, but he does a great job.”)

    Lesko told me she enjoyed most the days she spent interacting with constituents back home, but over six years, they could not make up for the family time she gave up on cross-country flights and on fundraising. “If I felt we were getting a whole lot accomplished, I would sacrifice it,” she said. Instead, Republicans spent a week in January 2023 fighting over their speaker and then did it all over again in October. “That certainly didn’t make me feel like I wanted to stay,” she told me.

    Patrick McHenry

    Representative Patrick McHenry introduced himself to much of America last year as a very frustrated man. The North Carolina Republican opened his unlikely stint as House speaker pro tempore with a memorable slam of the gavel—a brief eruption of anger aimed at the rump group of Republicans who had dethroned his ally, Speaker Kevin McCarthy.

    When McHenry arrived in Congress nearly two decades ago, he might have counted as one of the renegades. He was a brash 29-year-old who liked nothing more than to pick fights with Democrats on cable news. After his first term, however, McHenry began to shift his strategy and redraw his image. He wanted to become a serious legislator, capable of using influence in Congress to affect public policy. “I realized that my actions were not enabling my goal, so I changed how I operated,” he told me. He became less of a partisan brawler and more of an inside player, studying the institution and how leaders in both parties wielded power. “My early years in Congress were like graduate school,” McHenry said.

    McHenry is leaving with a reputation as a widely respected if not-quite-elder statesman (he’s only 48). He serves as the chair of the Financial Services Committee and acted as one of the GOP’s top negotiators of perhaps the most significant bill to come out of Congress last year, the Fiscal Responsibility Act, which prevented a debt default and ordered modest budget cuts. McHenry is retiring in part because he has to give up the committee gavel he so enjoys; Republican term limits allow most members to hold top committee posts for up to six years.

    He also passed up a bid for a more permanent promotion. At one point in October, some of the same Democrats who had chafed at McHenry’s bombast as a young lawmaker were open to the idea of him serving as speaker. McHenry told me he’d wanted to be speaker earlier in his career, but not anymore. He refused entreaties to seek election as speaker or even to use his temporary position to try to pass legislation. “It would have been to the institution’s detriment and, frankly, even to mine,” he told me. “So I decided the best course of action is to want for nothing during that time period, and that meant resisting the opportunity to use power.”

    When McHenry announced his retirement from the House two months later, he insisted that he was departing with none of the bitterness people might assume he carried. “I truly feel this institution is on the verge of the next great turn,” he said in his statement. When I asked him what gave him hope, he tried to put a positive spin on the dysfunction and disenchantment that have plagued Congress for years. “The operations of the House have been under severe pressure for a while,” McHenry said. “We have an institution that is struggling to perform in the current political environment.” He then made a prediction: “There’ll be significant changes that will happen in the coming congresses to make the place work.”

    He won’t be around to see them. The GOP’s term limits for committee leaders is an often-underappreciated reason for turnover in the party’s House ranks, but McHenry declined to seek a waiver so he could stay atop the Financial Services Committee. “I’m going to honor our rules,” he said. He hasn’t decided what comes next: “This chapter is closing, and I’ve got another chapter ahead of me.”

    Brad Wenstrup

    This much is clear: Representative Brad Wenstrup is not leaving the House out of frustration with Washington gridlock. “I reject the notion that this has been a do-nothing House of Representatives,” he told me. Wenstrup proceeded to read from a list that he said ran to 20 pages of bills that the narrow Republican majority had advanced through the lower chamber of Congress over the past year. Most of these measures are gathering dust in the Democratic-controlled Senate, but the fact that a onetime outsider like Wenstrup would be defending an embattled institution so fervently is itself something of a revelation.

    Wenstrup won election to the House a decade ago as a Tea Party–backed insurgent, having defeated an incumbent Republican in a surprising 2012 primary challenge from the right. He’ll leave next year as a leadership loyalist, positioned in the ideological center of a GOP conference that has grown decidedly more conservative in the past decade. He voted for the debt-ceiling deal in June, despite having criticized his first Republican opponent during their campaign for backing a similar bipartisan agreement. “Am I a conservative? Yes,” he said. “Did I try to advance common sense? Yes. Did I try to establish myself as a statesman? Yes.”

    Wenstrup has become an institutionalist in other ways too. His biggest complaint—a common one among small-government conservatives—is that federal agencies have taken too much power from Congress, evading proper oversight and interpreting laws beyond the intent of the legislators who wrote them. “We have to bring back Schoolhouse Rock,” Wenstrup said, recalling the cartoon that taught a generation of Americans a somewhat-idealized version of legislative sausage-making. “A bill on Capitol Hill gets signed by the president. That’s the law. Agencies don’t get to change it.”

    An Iraq War veteran who served as a combat surgeon, Wenstrup, 65, started his family later than most and has two young children in Ohio. He told me he had decided that this term would be his last in the House before any of the speaker tumult of the past year: “I decided that I wanted to make sure that I raised my kids, not someone else.”

    Victoria Spartz

    Good luck trying to predict Representative Victoria Spartz’s next move. The Indiana conservative is leaving Congress next year after just two terms—assuming she sticks with her plan.

    That hasn’t always been the case during Spartz’s short tenure in the House. She is fiercely protective of her options, and she has made her name by going her own way. At one point this fall, she threatened to resign her seat if Congress did not create a commission to tackle the federal debt. “I cannot save this Republic alone,” she said at the time. (Congress has created no such commission, but Spartz isn’t leaving quite yet.)

    Spartz, 45, is the only Ukrainian-born member of Congress, and she assumed a prominent role in the GOP after Russia’s invasion in 2022. Her nuanced position on the conflict has defied easy characterization. While cheering for Ukraine’s victory, she sharply criticized its prime minister, Volodymyr Zelensky, at a time when much of the West was rallying to his side. Spartz has accused Zelensky of “playing politics and theater” and demanded an investigation of one of his top aides. When members of the House Foreign Affairs Committee traveled to Ukraine on an official visit without her—she doesn’t serve on the panel—Spartz paid her own way and “crashed” the trip. She supports more U.S. aid to Ukraine, but not without conditions, and she believes that the funding must be more targeted toward heavy military equipment rather than humanitarian assistance. “Ukraine must win this war,” she told me, “but wars are won with weapons, and we need to be much faster, much tougher, and better.”

    Spartz again proved to be a wild card during the House’s recurring struggles over picking a speaker. During the 15 rounds of balloting last January, she supported Kevin McCarthy on the first three turns, then voted “present” eight times before returning to McCarthy for the final four rounds. In October, she voted with McCarthy’s critics to bring up a resolution to oust him as speaker, but on the climactic vote, she stuck with McCarthy. “Kevin wasn’t a bad guy. He just didn’t like to govern,” Spartz said.

    Midway through Spartz’s first term, Politico reported on high staff turnover in her congressional office, quoting former aides who described Spartz as a quick-tempered boss who frequently yelled at and belittled her underlings. Spartz made no effort to deny the accounts, telling Politico that her style was “not for everyone.” After winning a second term that fall, however, Spartz quickly announced that she would not seek office in 2024—forgoing both a third bid for the House and open statewide races for governor and Senate in Indiana.

    Her departure, she insisted to me, represents a break from politics, and not a retirement. “Sometimes it’s good to take some time off,” Spartz said. She denied that any of the drama of the past two years—the war in Ukraine, the speaker fights, criticism of her management—contributed to her decision to leave. Her children are now teenagers, Spartz said, and she wants to spend more time with them.

    Still, Spartz doesn’t quite seem at peace with her plans. Given her past shifts, I asked if she still might change her mind and run again. She wouldn’t, she said, but with a caveat: “Unless I get real upset!”

    Given the volatility of the past year in Congress, that’s a threat it would be wise not to ignore.

    [ad_2]

    Russell Berman

    Source link

  • Kevin McCarthy endorses Trump for president and would consider serving in his Cabinet

    Kevin McCarthy endorses Trump for president and would consider serving in his Cabinet

    [ad_1]

    WASHINGTON (AP) — Retiring Republican Rep. Kevin McCarthy, the ousted former House speaker, said he is endorsing Donald Trump for president and would consider serving in his Cabinet if the GOP front-runner were to win back the White House.

    McCarthy had a rocky relationship with the former president, notably when he declined to publicly support Trump’s bid for a second term, despite being one of his earliest and most loyal allies. But they always seem to patch things up, and as McCarthy prepares to leave Congress he gave his nod.

    “I will support the president. I will support President Trump,” McCarthy said in excerpts of an interview to air this weekend on “CBS News Sunday Morning.”

    McCarthy has not disclosed his post-Congress plans, but asked if he would willing to serve in a Trump cabinet, he said, “In the right position, look, if, if I’m the best person for the job, yes.”

    “Look, I worked with President Trump on a lot of policies. I, we, worked together to win the majority,” he told CBS’ Robert Costa in the interview, his first to air on TV since announcing he will leave Congress. “But we also have a relationship where we’re very honest with one another.”

    GOP lawmakers, even those who have opposed Trump strongly at times, are swiftly falling in line behind the party’s presumed nominee, as they brush past and ignore some of his more alarming authoritarian rhetoric.

    McCarthy, as he led the House’s slim GOP majority, had withheld his support for Trump as tried to keep a more neutral air and fundraise from wealthy donors, some of whom have soured on the former president.

    Also mindful that a number of rank-and-file lawmakers come from congressional districts that President Joe Biden won, McCarthy held back his endorsement so as not to put them in a political bind.

    But McCarthy, who depended on Trump’s backing to become speaker after a grueling 15-vote spectacle in January, has often made his way back to Trump.

    In the aftermath of the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol by Trump supporters, McCarthy at first called it one of the saddest days he had experienced in Congress, putting the blame on the former president — only to dash to Trump’s Mar-a-Lago club in Florida weeks later to mend the relationship.

    McCarthy was ousted as House speaker in October by his hard-right detractors, including some of Trump’s most loyal allies among the House GOP.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • House Speaker Mike Johnson Spent Years Defending Christian Speech In Public Schools

    House Speaker Mike Johnson Spent Years Defending Christian Speech In Public Schools

    [ad_1]

    Before coming to Congress, Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) spent years taking up lawsuits in defense of Christian speech and activities in public elementary schools and universities.

    Johnson, who was a relatively unknown Louisiana congressman before being elected House speaker last month, previously spent eight years as senior attorney for Alliance Defending Freedom, an evangelical legal group focused on dismantling LGBTQ+ rights and outlawing abortion. It was in his role there that Johnson, a constitutional lawyer, took up case after case aimed at chipping away at the separation of church and state.

    What’s alarming about this pattern in his background is that it raises questions about whether the House speaker ― the person second in line to the U.S. presidency ― disputes the first freedom guaranteed by the First Amendment in the Constitution: ”Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion.”

    In 2004, Johnson was the lead attorney for Stockwell Place Elementary when the Bossier Parish public school got sued for pushing Christianity on its students.

    A set of Jewish parents sued the school after learning it was holding prayer sessions, teaching Christian songs in class and promoting a teacher-led prayer group called Stallions for Christ that met during recess. The Jewish parents, who had two children at the school, also cited a teacher with a Christian cross on the classroom door, a Nativity scene in the school library and a graduation program featuring Christian songs and a student-led prayer, and religious speeches delivered by two local sheriff’s deputies.

    In their lawsuit, which you can read here, the parents claim their children were ridiculed and bullied by other kids for not participating in the religious songs. They raised concerns with the principal, who allegedly responded by defending the school’s Nativity scene and religious songs, and told the parents to “deal with it.” The parents also complained to the school superintendent, who allegedly defended the teacher-led prayer group because “this is the way things are done in the South” and “welcome to the Bible Belt.”

    Johnson spoke about the lawsuit at his church, the Airline Drive Church of Christ in Shreveport, before taking on the case. He warned the congregation what was at stake with cases like the Jewish family suing to keep Christian activities out of a public school.

    “The ultimate goal of the enemy is silencing the gospel,” said Johnson, according to an April 2004 story in the Shreveport Times about the lawsuit. “This is spiritual warfare.”

    Here’s the article in the the Shreveport Times from April 2004:

    “The ultimate goal of the enemy is silencing the gospel,” Johnson said in 2004 amid a lawsuit involving a Jewish family suing a public school for engaging students in Christian speech and activities.

    The Louisiana Republican also told church attendees, some of whom were reportedly nodding and wearing “I support Stockwell Place” T-shirts, that “if we don’t (win), they’re going to shut down all private religion expression.”

    Johnson’s comments at church came a week after he wrote an opinion piece in the Shreveport Times calling the Jewish family’s lawsuit “the latest example of the radical left’s desperate efforts to silence all public expression of religious faith.”

    Here’s Johnson’s article:

    Johnson said in 2004 that a Jewish family suing a public school for engaging in Christian speech and activities was "the latest example of the radical left’s desperate efforts to silence all public expression of religious faith.”
    Johnson said in 2004 that a Jewish family suing a public school for engaging in Christian speech and activities was “the latest example of the radical left’s desperate efforts to silence all public expression of religious faith.”

    Johnson spokesperson Taylor Haulsee on Tuesday disputed that the House speaker was referring to the Jewish family as “the enemy” in the 2004 lawsuit.

    “You are mischaracterizing his remark,” he said in a statement. “Johnson was referring to any coordinated attempt to impede religious expression that is protected under the Constitution, not any single family.”

    Haulsee also emphasized that the first bill Johnson brought to the House floor as speaker was a resolution condemning Hamas and standing with Israel.

    The lawsuit was settled in August 2005 with a consent order clarifying the types of religious expression allowed in public schools. But most of the case had been dismissed months earlier because the family moved out of state.

    “On or about December 28, 2004, the McBride family moved to Missouri to escape the harassment and threats Tyler and Kelsey were enduring at Stockwell Place Elementary,” reads a March 2005 amendment to the lawsuit.

    The American Civil Liberties Union, which was not officially a party to the case, said at the time that the Jewish family likely would have won their case had they not moved away.

    “The ACLU believes (the complaints) were meritorious and had the plaintiffs remained in the state, they would have been found meritorious,” Joe Cook, then the executive director of the ACLU’s Louisiana affiliate, told the Shreveport Times when the case was settled.

    Before coming to Congress, Johnson spent a lot of time defending religious speech and activities in public schools, specifically Christianity.
    Before coming to Congress, Johnson spent a lot of time defending religious speech and activities in public schools, specifically Christianity.

    Tom Williams via Getty Images

    In another case in 2006, Johnson represented parents suing the Katy Independent School District in Texas for allegedly trying to ban religious expression and “acknowledgement of the Christian religion.” The parents argued that the school district violated their First Amendment rights by preventing them from “speaking about their religious beliefs” and “distributing religious items or literature to classmates” on school grounds.

    This lawsuit was dismissed in 2010 with prejudice, meaning the plaintiffs can’t refile the same claim again in this court. The school did have to pay Johnson’s attorney fees, though.

    The House speaker twice represented teenagers, in 2007 and in 2008, who were denied public school transportation to a “Just for Jesus” religious event.

    In 2007, Johnson represented a high school student in a civil rights action lawsuit after her school refused to provide a bus for her club, called the One Way Club, to attend a “Just for Jesus” event. The student claimed that the school provided other clubs with transportation for fields trips and that it wasn’t fair to not provide a bus for the religious event. The lawsuit was eventually dismissed because the student found her own ride to the event.

    A year later, Johnson represented a middle school student who sued her school for not providing a bus to the same event. This student, who was part of the Fellowship of Christian Athletes, claimed that she was denied school transportation to the “Just for Jesus” event because she and others in her club talked about their religious beliefs.

    School officials claimed the real issue was safety concerns, because there was a shooting near the “Just for Jesus” event the year before, and some students had been “injured and fearful.” The school officials suggested the organizers of the event hold it during non-school hours or on the weekend. As a compromise, school officials offered to give students excused absences if they went to the event on their own during the school day.

    The judge in the case ruled that the school worked in good faith with the student by offering an excused absence and rejected Johnson’s argument that the student demonstrated “a substantial threat of irreparable injury.” The student voluntarily ended her suit shortly afterward.

    “It is repugnant to Sonnier that he … must obtain governmental permission to talk to a student about his Christian faith.”

    – Johnson defending a traveling evangelist’s right to preach on a public university campus.

    Johnson also led lawsuits in defense of religious speech on the campuses of public universities. In 2008, he lost a case involving a traveling evangelist who sued Southeastern Louisiana University after a school police officer told him he had to move to a free speech zone on campus to deliver his remarks and get his speech pre-approved.

    As they stood there, the evangelist, Jeremy Sonnier, began engaging with a student about religion, at which point the officer warned he would be arrested if he didn’t move.

    Sonnier’s legal argument, led by Johnson, was that the university’s speech policy was “unduly burdensome” and based on religious grounds.

    “It is repugnant to Sonnier that he, as an individual citizen, must obtain governmental permission to talk to a student about his Christian faith,” reads the legal document, presumably written by Johnson.

    A passage from a lawsuit led by Johnson in 2008 in defense of a traveling evangelist.
    A passage from a lawsuit led by Johnson in 2008 in defense of a traveling evangelist.

    U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana

    A federal judge ultimately dismissed the case with prejudice, meaning Sonnier can’t refile the same claim again in the court.

    In another lawsuit in 2003, Johnson represented a student at Texas Tech University who accused the school of violating his First Amendment rights by requiring him to get his speech pre-approved in order to speak on campus in a spot that was not in the “free speech area” gazebo. The student was challenging a school policy that barred students from engaging in speech that might “intimidate” or “humiliate” another person on campus.

    The university initially denied a permit to the student to deliver remarks outside of the designated area expressing his religious view that “homosexuality is a sinful, immoral and unhealthy lifestyle,” and passing out literature citing Scripture. But the student was ultimately given permission to do this if he moved across the street.

    In 2008, Johnson was the lead attorney for the Tangipahoa Parish school board in Louisiana when it got sued for opening its meetings with prayers and requiring they be delivered by eligible members of the clergy in the parish.

    The plaintiff took issue with the school board bringing religion into its meetings at all and with the denial of his wife’s request to give an invocation at a meeting because she was a non-denominational Christian.

    “Plaintiff finds equally objectionable the non-secular manner in which the Board meetings are conducted,” reads the plaintiff’s legal filing. “The Board meetings are an integral part of Tangipahoa Parish public school system, requiring the Board to refrain from injecting religion into them. By commencing the meetings with a prayer, the Board is conveying its endorsement of religion.”

    The lawsuit was dismissed in 2010 after the parties reached a compromise.

    Asked Tuesday if Johnson fundamentally disagrees with the separation of church and state, his office pointed to comments that he made last week on CNBC, when he claimed that Americans “misunderstand” the concept.

    “When the Founders set this system up, they wanted a vibrant expression of faith in the public square because they believed that a general moral consensus and virtue was necessary,” Johnson said in the TV interview. “The separation of church and state is a misnomer. People misunderstand it.”

    He claimed that Thomas Jefferson meant something entirely different from what we think it means when he coined the phrase.

    “What he was explaining is they did not want the government to encroach upon the church, not that they didn’t want principles of faith to have influence on our public life,” Johnson said. “It’s exactly the opposite.”

    He never actually said, though, if he disagrees with the separation of church and state.

    “An abject danger to our democracy.”

    – Rachel Laser of Americans United for Separation of Church and State

    Rachel Laser, the president and CEO of Americans United for Separation of Church and State, said she has “grave concerns” about Johnson’s claims.

    “Any public official ― let alone the speaker of the House and second in line to be president ― who claims America is a Christian nation and discredits church-state separation is an abject danger to our democracy,” she said.

    Laser said Johnson is “repeating the myth that Christian nationalists typically use” to deny that church-state separation is foundational to democracy.

    “Church-state separation is baked into the Constitution, from Article VI’s prohibition on religious tests for public office to the First Amendment’s religious freedom protections. Our freedoms, equality and democracy rest on that wall of separation. Without it, America would not be America.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Speaker Mike Johnson Unveils Never-Before-Attempted Budget Proposal to Avert US Government Shutdown

    Speaker Mike Johnson Unveils Never-Before-Attempted Budget Proposal to Avert US Government Shutdown

    [ad_1]

    With a partial government shutdown looming in less than a week, US Speaker of the House Mike Johnson unveiled a two-step plan on Saturday to fund the government through the new year. The stopgap funding bill, often referred to as a “continuing resolution,” would extend funding for several federal agencies until late January, while the rest of the government would be funded through early February.

    Johnson defended the bill as bucking “the absurd holiday-season omnibus tradition of massive, loaded up spending bills introduced right before the Christmas recess,” in a post on the social media platform X, formerly known as Twitter.

    The Louisiana conservative, who has been in the top House job for less than a month and has never chaired a House committee, faces a steep climb to get the bill passed before the November 17 midnight deadline. If all Democrats are present and vote against the bill, Johnson can afford only four defectors in his own party in a vote that could come as early as Tuesday.

    Yet the bill has to satisfy two dramatically opposed constituencies. On one side are the far-right House GOP members who ousted Johnson’s predecessor, Kevin McCarthy, over his resistance to imposing deep spending cuts during the budgeting process and have called for a staggered funding process. On the other hand, more moderate members in both chambers of Congress don’t like the idea of bifurcating the deadlines for funding federal programs. Johnson conceded during a private conference call with lawmakers Saturday that the bill likely would not get universal support from Republicans, The New York Times reported.

    In just the last week alone, the House GOP punted on two separate funding votes due to divisions between hardline and moderate members, a sign that the sharp divisions that opened up during the speakership fiasco have not disappeared.

    Already, some members of Congress in both parties are voicing their displeasure with Johnson’s proposal. Texas Representative Chip Roy, a hard-right House Freedom Caucus member, wrote that his opposition to the bill, which does not include any spending cuts, “cannot be overstated.” In another post, he wrote that he opposes the bill “100%”. On Thursday, amid reports that Johnson was weighing pushing forward with a staggered bill, Senate Appropriations Committee chair and Washington Democratic Senator Patty Murray called the plan “the craziest, stupidest thing I’ve ever heard of.”

    The Biden administration immediately pounced on the plan. In a statement hours after Johnson unveiled the bill, White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre called it “a recipe for more Republican chaos and more shutdowns.”

    “With just days left before an extreme Republican shutdown — and after shutting down Congress for three weeks after they ousted their own leader — House Republicans are wasting precious time with an unserious proposal that has been panned by members of both parties,” Jean-Pierre said.

    The White House is reportedly already prepping surrogates to use the likelihood of a shutdown to boost Joe Biden’s stubbornly low approval ratings. “The clock is ticking,” reads a copy of talking points distributed to Biden allies and obtained by Politico. “We are just X days from an Extreme Republican Shutdown that would: Force servicemembers and law enforcement officers to work without pay—risk significant delays for travelers. Undermine public health. Cut off funding for small businesses.”

    On Friday, the ratings firm Moody’s downgraded the United States’ credit outlook to “negative,” citing “continued political polarization” within Congress.

    [ad_2]

    Jack McCordick

    Source link

  • Speaker Johnson: GOP Funding Israel Aid By Gutting the IRS Is Just Us Being “Good Stewards of the Taxpayer’s Resources”

    Speaker Johnson: GOP Funding Israel Aid By Gutting the IRS Is Just Us Being “Good Stewards of the Taxpayer’s Resources”

    [ad_1]

    Freshly minted House Speaker Mike Johnson is defending his plan to fund U.S. aid to Israel by gutting the Internal Revenue Service as evidence of Republicans “trying to be good stewards of the taxpayer’s resources,” even as research points to the plan adding significantly to the government deficit.

    Johnson’s first significant move since his meteoric rise to power was to push forward with a bill to pay for a $14.3 billion aid package for Israel by cutting the same amount from the IRS.

    The bill, which passed the House largely along party lines on Thursday, faces a steep uphill battle in the Senate, given that Majority Leader Chuck Schumer promises to avoid bringing it up for a vote.

    Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell has said he’d prefer to have the Israel aid incorporated into a broader aid package that would include funding to Ukraine and Taiwan as well as reforms to U.S. border policy. President Joe Biden—who in October proposed a $106 billion foreign aid package that would do just that—has also threatened to veto the House legislation if it comes across his desk

    Johnson defended his plan in a Sunday interview with Fox News’ Shannon Beam. “We weighed priorities and said, ‘It is more important to protect Israel than to hire more IRS agents,’” he said.

    “Instead of printing new dollars or borrowing it from another nation to send over to fulfill our obligations and help our ally, we want to pay for it. What a concept,” he added. “We are trying to change how Washington works.”

    A nonpartisan report released by the Congressional Budget Office challenges Johnson’s assessment and finds that the plan would actually result in over $26 billion in lost government revenue over the next decade, which translates to adding over $12 billion to the deficit.

    That’s because the cuts target funding to the agency provided by Biden’s signature Inflation Reduction Act that focuses on making it easier for people to pay their taxes and for the agency to crack down on wealthy tax cheats.

    “All of those [Inflation Reduction Act] funds go to increased scrutiny on tax evasion going on at the highest wealth — that is millionaires, billionaires, large corporations and large complex partnerships,” IRS Commissioner Danny Werfel said last week. “When you reduce those audits, you reduce the amount of money that we can collect and return to the Treasury for other priorities,” Werfel predicted the GOP plan would add up to $90 billion to the deficit.

    In his Sunday interview, Johnson dodged a question from Beam about whether his plan would add to the deficit. “Right now, we have a $33.6 trillion deferral debt. Just last week, the Treasury Department of the Biden administration said we’re going to have to borrow over $1.5 trillion over the next two quarters, six months to continue our operation as a government,” Johnson said. “This is not a sustainable track. We can take care of our obligations, but we can do it in a responsible manner, and that’s what we’re committed to.”

    Johnson also defended the House GOP’s plans to marry funding for Ukraine with funding for the U.S. southern border. “When you couple Ukraine and the border, that makes sense to people,” he said. “If we’re going to protect Ukraine’s border … we have to take care of our own border first.”

    Though the House’s Israel aid bill is almost certainly dead on arrival in the Senate, Johnson’s intransigence does mean that Congress will likely continue to struggle to approve any emergency spending plan that would provide aid to Israel and Ukraine in the coming weeks.

    [ad_2]

    Jack McCordick

    Source link

  • House Speaker Mike Johnson Responds to New Round of Scrutiny About Black Son

    House Speaker Mike Johnson Responds to New Round of Scrutiny About Black Son

    [ad_1]

    Mike Johnson’s meteoric elevation from an under-the-radar congressman from Louisiana to second-in-line to the U.S. presidency sent journalists, Democrats and Republicans alike to uncover information about the personal and professional history of the most right-wing and least experienced House Speaker in history, who took the top job on Wednesday. 

    On the day Johnson was voted in, several major right-wing social media accounts on X, formerly known as Twitter, began circulating clips of an interview Johnson gave to PBS in 2020, in which he told journalist Walter Isaacson that the police killing of George Floyd was “an act of murder” and called for “systemic change.” Notably, Johnson said in the interview that he had learned about racism in America through the experience of raising a Black son, Michael. 

    Johnson said his Black son had a more difficult life than his white son “simply because of the color of his skin.” “Michael being a Black American, and Jack being white Caucasian. They have different challenges,” he said. “My son Jack has an easier path. He just does.”

    Daily Wire podcaster Matt Walsh described Johnson’s comments as a “full-fledged endorsement of the Left’s racial narrative,” while far-right anti-Muslim activist Laura Loomer accused the new Speaker of being an “undercover Democrat.” Pro-DeSantis conservative influencer Pedro Gonzalez wrote that Johnson had “completely internalized left-wing racial libel about white supremacy and privilege.”

    Talking Points Memo’s Josh Marshall noted on Friday that there were no photos of Michael on Johnson’s House website or his Facebook page. His son also does not appear in Johnson’s official biography.

    Speculation about whether Michael was a real person prompted Johnson’s office to clarify. “When Speaker Johnson first ran for Congress in 2016, he and his wife, Kelly, spoke to their son Michael—who they took in as newlyweds when Michael was 14 years old,” said Corinne Day, Johnson’s communications director, in a statement first reported by Newsweek. “At the time of the Speaker’s election to Congress, Michael was an adult with a family of his own. He asked not to be involved in their new public life.” Day added that Johnson “maintains a close relationship with Michael to this day.”

    Day told Newsweek that the Johnson family did not formally adopt Michael because of the “lengthy … process,” and declined to say whether Michael used the same surname as the family.

    Johnson’s Black son came up in 2019, when Johnson testified before a subcommittee of the House Judiciary Committee considering a resolution that would establish a commission to examine possible reparations proposals. In comments that drew boos from some in the hearing, Johnson said that he had asked his son about the idea of reparations for slavery, and that his son said he opposed it.

    In his first major interview after ascending to the top House job last week, Johnson appeared to downplay his previous comments about how racism affected Michael’s life. “Having raised two 14-year-old boys in America and the state of Louisiana, they had different experiences,” he told Fox News’ Sean Hannity. “And I’m not so sure it was all about skin color, but it is about culture and society. Michael, our first, came from a really troubled background and had a lot of challenges.”

    [ad_2]

    Jack McCordick

    Source link

  • Republicans Hope The Chaos Of Recent Weeks Will Become A Distant Memory In Next Year’s Elections

    Republicans Hope The Chaos Of Recent Weeks Will Become A Distant Memory In Next Year’s Elections

    [ad_1]

    WASHINGTON (AP) — “Embarrassing,” “chaotic” and “irresponsible.” And those were just the words that House Republicans used to describe the past three weeks as they removed one speaker from office and splintered over three successive nominees before finally landing on Rep. Mike Johnson, R-La.

    Now they hope voters won’t hold the GOP’s infighting against them as they seek to hold onto their exceedingly narrow House majority in next year’s election.

    Republicans already had a tough task on their hands. They can afford to lose only four seats to maintain the majority, and 18 of their incumbents are running in districts won by President Joe Biden in 2020. A Supreme Court decision siding with Black voters in a redistricting lawsuit could give Democrats a pick-up opportunity in Alabama. And Republican Rep. George Santos’ extensive legal troubles will make it harder for the GOP to keep that Long Island-based district in the Republican column.

    Some Republicans worry the infighting that essentially shuttered the House for three weeks will serve as a further headwind against Republicans in their bid to stay in the majority. Some already sounded resigned to serving in the minority during the past week’s ups and downs in finding a new speaker, while others voiced hopes the passage of time will make the past three weeks a distant memory.

    “Look, it’s not going to be great for ’24. I’m not optimistic about keeping a majority because of the eight individuals’ actions,” said Rep. Max Miller, a first-term Republican from Ohio. “But I just continue to stress that 4% of the conference did this. It’s not indicative of the Republican Party.”

    Miller was referring to the eight Republicans who voted with Democrats to oust McCarthy as speaker after just nine months on the job. Republicans also look to put some of the onus for the past three weeks on Democrats.

    “I think it has damaged the party, but we have to remember who plunged us into chaos. It was eight right-wing, fringe Republicans and every single Democrat,” said. Rep. Nicole Malliotakis, R-N.Y. “They worked with the very people they tell us to run from to take out a speaker that 97% of our conference supported without zero plan on what to do next.”

    WASHINGTON, DC – OCTOBER 23: A DNC projection compares House Republicans’ failure to elect a speaker to a clown show on October 23, 2023 in Washington, DC. (Photo by Leigh Vogel/Getty Images for DNC)

    Leigh Vogel via Getty Images

    Rep. Suzan DelBene, the chair of the campaign arm for House Democrats, said candidates in key swing districts will contrast the fractures among House Republicans with a Democratic focus on the need to govern and meet constituents’ priorities.

    “The No. 1 thing you hear from folks is why don’t folks focus on governing? Why is there so much infighting? And this isn’t fighting between parties. This is Republicans fighting with Republicans, bullying Republicans, even threatening each other. That’s what the American people are seeing right now,” DelBene said.

    One Republican strategist harkened back to similar turmoil a decade ago to argue that GOP candidates will probably emerge unscathed from the recent House chaos.

    In 2013, House Republicans engineered a showdown over the Affordable Care Act, insisting that a spending bill to avoid a shutdown include measures to roll back key parts of then-President Barack Obama’s health care law.

    The Republican-controlled House passed two spending bills with amendments aimed at crippling the law. The Senate, which was controlled by Democrats, rejected both measures. That left House Republicans with the choice of funding the government or shutting it down over their opposition to the healthcare law, and they chose the latter.

    “I remember working in the House in the 2013 shutdown, and part of why we did that was we thought our members needed to touch the hot stove and realize they were going to get burnt,” said Doug Heye, who worked under then-House Majority Leader Eric Cantor, R-Va. “And the reality is nothing happened. There was no political price for any of those members to pay.”

    The following year, House Republicans gained 13 seats in the election, giving them their largest majority since President Herbert Hoover’s administration. And they gained nine Senate seats, retaking the majority.

    That was a midterm election, in which members of the party not in control of the White House tend to perform better. Next year, the nominees for the presidency will be the center of attention for voters, with a likely rematch between Biden and former President Donald Trump. How the eventual nominees fare will go a long way in determining congressional races, as Americans increasingly vote along party lines.

    “The only saving grace is that Biden’s economic numbers are in the toilet,” said Rep. Don Bacon, R-Neb., who represents one of the more evenly divided districts in the country. “In the end, I think Americans will be more worried about the state of the country, the economy, the foreign policy stuff. But this surely doesn’t help us.”

    Rep. Marc Molinaro, a first-term Republican from New York, said he hopes voters will judge the Republican candidates on the totality of their work.

    “The last three weeks were among the most distressing and disappointing, not only for me but among the most distressing and disappointing in the history of that chamber,” he said, nodding toward the House side of the Capitol. “We should be judged by not only those three weeks but how we now rebuild moving forward.”

    Rep. David Schweikert, who represents an Arizona district Biden carried in 2020, said he was going on radio shows and having conversations in Costco to get the message out that the House’s dysfunction was to be blamed on a handful of Republicans acting out of emotion rather than ideology.

    “You don’t hide from it, you say, ‘Look, this is embarrassing,’” he said.

    He said the debacle may hurt “generic Republicans” trying to win in swing districts, but also contended that the election is still a far way off and argued it would be a distant memory by next November.

    The fractures in the Republican Party that dogged McCarthy during his short tenure aren’t going away just because the House has a new speaker. In just a few weeks, House Republicans are going to have to find a way to fund the government at levels that the White House and a Democratic-led Senate will accept, or risk a government shutdown. Further turmoil will only feed into the Democratic argument that House Republicans are incapable of governing.

    “Going into the ballot booth in November, I don’t think many people are going to remember anything that happened in October of 2023,” said Rep. Dusty Johnson, R-S.D. “But if this a foretaste of the feast to come, then we’re in massive trouble.”

    AP writer Stephen Groves contributed to this report.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • New House Speaker Thinks Creationist Museum Is ‘Pointing People To The Truth’

    New House Speaker Thinks Creationist Museum Is ‘Pointing People To The Truth’

    [ad_1]

    Before arriving in Washington less than a decade ago, House Speaker Mike Johnson, a deeply religious Christian, was a legal crusader associated with a fringe evangelical movement called “young Earth creationism,” based on a literal reading of the Bible’s Book of Genesis that posits the Earth is only several thousand years old.

    In the mere hours since Johnson was elected speaker Wednesday, he hadn’t had to address his views on creationism and evolution. But his close ties to a leader of the creationist movement and his past legal work — on behalf of the Ark Encounter creationist theme park, where children can learn that dinosaurs were passengers on Noah’s Ark — seem to suggest that he’s also personally aligned with these beliefs.

    “The Ark Encounter is one way to bring people to this recognition of the truth, that what we read in the Bible are actual historical events,” Johnson said in a 2021 interview with Ark Encounter founder Ken Ham while guest-hosting the radio show of Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, an evangelical activist group.

    Johnson has close personal and professional ties to Ham, the founder and CEO of Answers in Genesis, the Christian group that’s behind Ark Encounter and the Creation Museum, both based in Kentucky. As an attorney, Johnson helped the gigantic ark attraction, which opened in 2016, secure millions in state tourism subsidies while also defending its right to make religious-based hiring decisions.

    “Kentucky officials are smart to enthusiastically embrace the Ark Encounter, and the millions of tourists the park will welcome to the area from every viewpoint, race, color, religion and creed,” Johnson wrote in an op-ed that appeared in the Louisville Courier Journal in 2014. “Answers in Genesis aims to encourage critical thought and respectful public debate about the various attractions and ideas that will be presented at its park, and that is the beauty and essence of free speech.”

    Johnson wasn’t just the legal muscle for Answers in Genesis, which embraces the belief that the “account of origins presented in Genesis 1-11 is a simple but factual presentation of actual events.” He blogged on the organization’s website and spoke at a conference it hosted in 2022. Johnson and his wife, Kelly, a counselor who is also his podcast collaborator, are slated to appear at another Answers in Genesis conference in April 2024: “Overcoming the War on Women for the Glory of God.”

    Johnson has called Ham a “dear friend,” and, when hosting him on his podcast, “Truth Be Told,” Johnson thanked him for his friendship and ministry over the years. Ham returned the kind words at an Answers in Genesis conference in 2021, when he called Johnson one of the few “godly men” in Congress.

    New House Speaker Mike Johnson has been a major legal defender of Ark Encounter, a Bible-themed attraction in Williamstown, Kentucky.

    STEFANI REYNOLDS via Getty Images

    Ham’s views are what you would expect for a person who operates a “life-size” Noah’s Ark museum that features dinosaurs catching a ride on a biblically accurate 300-cubits-long ark.

    “We can say, 100 percent absolutely for sure, that people lived with dinosaurs!” Ham writes in his 2000 book, “Dinosaurs in Eden.” As a believer in biblical inerrancy, he believes the story of Genesis is both literally true and that its first 11 chapters hold all of the answers about how to live a moral life. He has cited the teaching of evolution as the reason for modern society’s ills and supports waging a culture war to fight back against atheists and materialists.

    Johnson’s congressional office did not respond to a request for comment about his views on young Earth theory, whose adherents believe the planet is 6,000 years old and that humans walked the Earth at the same time as dinosaurs. The scientific community regards creationism as pseudoscience and is generally in agreement the Earth is an estimated 4.5 billion years old.

    In the limited time that reporters and researchers have had to dig deeply into Johnson’s life — he became a national GOP figure only in the last week and hails from a noncompetitive district in Louisiana — it does not appear Johnson has publicly said anything to suggest he doesn’t accept the theory of evolution. Reporters have, however, uncovered a litany of anti-LGBTQ and anti-abortion sentiments in Johnson’s not-so-recent past.

    But he has appeared sympathetic to the creationist cause and has fiercely defended its followers on First Amendment grounds.

    In a sermon delivered in 2016 at Christian Center Shreveport in Louisiana, Johnson also blamed school shootings on a lack of godliness that he suggested was rooted in teaching children they “evolve from the primordial slime,” according to meidastouch.com.

    In addition to his work with Answers in Genesis, Johnson has been associated with the National Council on Bible Curriculum in Public Schools, which critics say espouses creationist teachings over education about evolution.

    The teaching of evolution in public schools has been controversial for more than a century. States began passing laws banning the teaching of evolution in the early 20th century, which led to the infamous 1925 Scopes Monkey Trial. But it wasn’t until 1968 that the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Epperson v. Arkansas that bans on teaching evolution were unconstitutional. Later court decisions prohibited the teaching of creation science (in 1987) and intelligent design (in 2005) in public schools.

    Johnson’s critics fear he would try to inject Christian ideology into how he governs the U.S. House as second-in-line for the presidency. They also see young Earth creationism as a tentacle of the Christian nationalist movement, whose goal is to create a Christian theocracy in the U.S.

    “His policy agenda appears to be in lockstep with that of a shadow network of Christian nationalist groups in our country or working to preserve traditional power structures and win privilege for conservative Christianity,” said Rachel Laser, the president of Americans United for Separation of Church and State.

    As a state representative in 2015, Johnson came to the defense of a Louisiana public school district under fire for making creationism and Bible study part of its curriculum — and offered to defend the district for free through his “Christian” law firm, Freedom Guard, Slate reported. Johnson has described Freedom Guard as a “public interest law firm.”

    “The concern that you’re articulating should be of concern to more than just creationists,” Johnson said in an interview that same year with a creationist activist who described being forced to learn what he called false evolutionary theories in school. “All freedom-loving Americans ought to have grave concerns about these government abuses, regardless of their perspectives on Genesis or even the Christian faith, for that matter.”

    William Trollinger, the author of “Righting America at the Creation Museum,” said the Answers in Genesis exhibits, instead of being insulated from politics, are deeply reflective of the nation’s divides. “These are culture war sites,” Trollinger told HuffPost. “Young Earth creationism is very much a part of MAGA culture. There are very few politically moderate young Earth creationists in the United States.”

    In September 2022, Johnson and his wife hosted Ham on their “Truth Be Told” podcast, which has been around since March of that year. In their conversation, the Johnsons heavily promoted Ham’s Creation Museum in Petersburg, Kentucky.

    “For all of our friends who have not made a visit, it’s hard to describe…. It’s really an awesome experience.”

    – House Speaker Mike Johnson on the Creation Museum

    “For all of our friends who have not made a visit, it’s hard to describe,” Mike Johnson said. “It’s really an awesome experience.”

    During their discussion, Ham blamed the teaching of “atheistic evolution” for corrupting the youth and leading them to turn away from the church. He argued that instead church leaders and parents need to teach children how to defend church doctrine through biblical study and argument so that they will know and be able to properly argue that “the fossil record wasn’t laid down over millions of years, that’s the graveyard of the flood.”

    “To teach them all these things — that’s what’s been missing from the church,” Ham said.

    “I think that’s right,” Johnson replied.

    At the end of their conversation, Johnson again praised Ham’s Creation Museum and the Ark Encounter for “doing maybe the best work right now in our generation of pointing people to the truth.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • There Goes Another One: Tom Emmer’s Speakership Bid Is Officially Kaput

    There Goes Another One: Tom Emmer’s Speakership Bid Is Officially Kaput

    [ad_1]

    Three weeks after a band of eight rogue lawmakers voted to strip Kevin McCarthy of the gavel, the rudderless House Republican caucus claimed another victim Tuesday evening. Republican Tom Emmer became the latest Republican to try—and fail—to win the House Speakership after five secret ballot votes and one roll-call vote, yet again leaving the conference scrambling for a leader. Emmer reportedly stepped aside in a closed-door meeting on Capitol Hill, which the Minnesota lawmaker abruptly left as his chances evaporated.

    Earlier in the day, Emmer emerged as the Speaker designee after he beat out eight other candidates in the latest attempt by House Republicans to coalesce around a successor to McCarthy. But despite winning a total of 117 votes in a runoff against his colleague Mike Johnson, it quickly became clear that Emmer was short of the threshold needed to win on the House floor, leading to a brief recess.

    As Republican lawmakers trickled out of the roll-call vote Tuesday afternoon, a number had expressed skepticism that the majority whip could win over the more than two dozen remaining holdouts. “You’ve got to understand, you go through the alphabet, you start at A, and you move your way forward through the alphabet. By the time it got to the letter N…we already had upwards of 20 that said that they could not support Tom Emmer for Speaker,” Texas representative Troy Nehls told reporters. “This is where we are again, back to where we started. This is where we’re at.” 

    Other Republicans had struck a more optimistic tone. “I think Emmer is showing tremendous leadership. He’s standing at the mic and people with concerns are coming forward. And he’s taking them on head-to-head,” South Dakota representative Dusty Johnson said to the scrum. Vern Buchanan also praised Emmer’s efforts to win over the holdouts after the roll-call vote. “The idea is that we don’t leave here, leave town, until we get a Speaker,” the Florida Republican said. “I’m confident we’ll get where we need to be.” 

    Steve Scalise—who personally knows just how difficult it is to unite his colleagues, having dropped out of the race himself—telegraphed the steep challenges Emmer faced. “We are working right now through some questions,” he said. “Obviously we want to work to make sure when we get to the floor, we have 217…. But this is an ongoing process,” Scalise added. “The first thing that Tom’s doing is hearing people out.”

    But ultimately, Emmer’s best attempts to cajole the holdouts were not enough. The Minnesota lawmaker’s path to 217 was always going to be a rocky one. After all, Emmer was the fourth choice for House Speaker after McCarthy was removed and Scalise and Jim Jordan failed to secure enough GOP support to win on the floor. There was also the snag that is Donald Trump: While the former president first made a milquetoast statement regarding Emmer’s bid, he later took to Truth Social to criticize the GOP whip as a “RINO”—an acronym for “Republican in name only.” The ex-president’s allies reportedly went on to share the post with House Republicans.

    Emmer’s loss is also something of a blow to Democrats. As Punchbowl News reported Tuesday morning, House Democrats were considering strategic absences to help Emmer, viewing the Minnesota Republican as the most palatable of the slate of candidates. Speaking with reporters Tuesday, Steny Hoyer—the former number two in House Democratic leadership—cast Emmer as a lesser of evils while stopping short of confirming that Democrats would be willing to throw Emmer a life vest on the House floor. “I’m not willing to make a comment until the Republican Party makes a decision,” he said.

    Such discussions, it seems, were moot, anyway. After 21 days without a Speaker, House Republicans are back to square one in their leadership search as tensions within the caucus continue to boil over.

    [ad_2]

    Abigail Tracy

    Source link