Tom Williams/CQ Roll Call via AP Images
House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) talks with the media before a vote on the continuing resolution to fund the government, December 19, 2024, at the Capitol in Washington.
Let those of us in journalism give a word of thanks to the House Republican caucus for making the early days of January in odd-numbered years more interesting. Tomorrow kicks off the 119th Congress, and in the House it must start with a Speaker election. For roughly all of American history, this election was a staid and indeed invisible affair. But starting in 2023, a fractious Republican caucus has made this a suddenly interesting contest, full of uncertainty and intrigue. And if it’s not taken care of by Monday, there’s an outside chance we could see an enormously entertaining outcome: Republicans pulling off a self-imposed January 6th revolt.
In the 118th Congress, Rep. Mike Johnson (R-LA) was the eventual benefactor of Freedom Caucus disenchantment with former Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-CA). But the way Johnson bungled the year-end spending bill has escalated already-existing grumbling with his leadership.
Johnson was already challenged in the last Congress with a motion to vacate the chair last May, after he successfully steered additional funding to Ukraine. That motion was swiftly tabled, with Democrats pitching in to save Johnson’s job. But the Speaker did lose 11 Republican votes, and among them are some of the prime candidates to abandon Johnson on tomorrow’s Speaker vote.
The new rules package actually makes it harder to overturn a Speaker once they’re elected; it would take nine members working together to force a vote rather than one. But in order to get new rules in place, the House has to elect a Speaker, with a majority of those members voting. The Republican advantage is likely 219-215 at the outset of Congress (unless Matt Gaetz shows up to claim the 220th Republican seat, which is unlikely). If a member votes “present,” he or she is taken out of the total. If everyone votes for somebody, Johnson can only lose one Republican. If three Republicans vote present, Johnson could still survive, but a fourth present vote would trigger a loss.
Already, Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY) is a firm no, giving Johnson no wiggle room whatsoever. Others are undecided, including Reps. Chip Roy (R-TX), Andy Biggs (R-AZ), and Freedom Caucus chair Andy Harris (R-MD). Rep. Victoria Spartz (R-IN), a wild card who has said she won’t caucus with Republicans in the next Congress, delivered a list of demands for her vote involving federal spending. All of these members except for Harris voted against Johnson in May. Other Republicans could seek concessions on the aforementioned House rules, including around the motion to vacate, in exchange for their votes. But Johnson has let it be known that he’s not going to make any deals on House rules.
One problem for Republicans is that they only have three days to get the Speaker in place before January 6, when the presidential electors are confirmed by Congress, rolls around. The typical scenario for the House is that they must select a Speaker first, and only move forward afterward. Members-elect aren’t even sworn in as members of the House until there’s a Speaker.
The vote will provide another test of whether Trump has as much juice with Republicans as people assume.
In an attempt to prevent any hiccups for his re-election, Donald Trump gave Johnson an endorsement on Monday. In comments to reporters, Trump made it pretty clear that his seal of approval was because “he’s the one that can win right now … others are very good too, but they have 30 or 40 people that don’t like them, so that’s pretty tough.” Indeed, the other contenders for the Speaker’s gavel, from House Majority Leader Steve Scalise (R-LA) to Majority Whip Tom Emmer (R-MN) to House Judiciary Committee chair Jim Jordan (R-OH), have enough opposition from factions of the caucus to lack the outright majority needed to be elected. Trump is clearly seeking the path of least resistance that will not paralyze Republicans from carrying out his agenda, and more importantly from certifying his electors.
But the Trump endorsement certainly didn’t sway Massie. Roy and Rep. Rich McCormick (R-GA) weren’t fully supportive either. Others who abandoned Johnson last May include Reps. Eric Burlison (R-MO), Eli Crane (R-AZ), Warren Davidson (R-OH), Paul Gosar (R-AZ), Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA), and Barry Moore (R-AL). (Rep. Alex Mooney of West Virginia also voted against Johnson last year, but he’s no longer in Congress.)
The vote will provide another test of whether Trump has as much juice with Republicans as people assume. He didn’t get a debt limit increase or suspension stuffed into the year-end funding bill, and he aborted the Gaetz attorney general nomination early. If he can’t push Johnson over the line, the words “lame-duck president” might have to appear.
But the looming election certification will certainly concentrate GOP minds and raise the pressure to get a Speaker through already. Hard-liners may be checking parliamentary procedure rule books out of the library right now. The big question is: If the House cannot get it together to choose a Speaker before January 6, can the electoral votes be counted?
The answer is a qualified yes, with the proviso that it’s never really been done before. The House could elect a temporary Speaker just for the election certification, who would step down after an actual Speaker was selected. A version of this was done when the now-retired Rep. Patrick McHenry (R-NC) was put in place temporarily in 2023 after McCarthy was ousted. The House clerk, who will essentially be in charge when business begins on January 3, could also be granted the power to swear in members and carry out the election certification.
There would have to be at least some unanimity to do this, at least from House Republicans. They all have an interest in not making their MAGA daddy mad right at the beginning of his second term. But getting Republicans to agree on anything at all, even getting Trump elected, has been a stretch. The chances are therefore exceedingly remote—but nonzero—that House Republicans will disrupt the electoral count for a second straight presidential election, the first time by inciting a mob, the second simply through their own obstinacy.
The much bigger issue is what the still-uncertain Speaker race, at this late date, says about whether a Republican trifecta can get anything done. The current leadership in the House and Senate has no track record, zero, of legislative success. In the House, far-right Freedom Caucus types have more than enough numbers to stymie anything they don’t like, and the same goes for more moderate frontliners concerned about job security. The Senate still has a filibuster, which pushes the more consequential legislation into budget reconciliation. If far-right Republicans again carry a veto on the House Rules Committee, must-pass legislation would again probably need Democratic votes in the House. And the debt limit is still hanging out there, which most Republicans don’t ever want to pass.
Republicans don’t seem to have aligned on how to begin. It does look like the Senate will go first with a two-step process, initiating a quick-strike reconciliation bill with about $100 billion in border money and possibly some defense funds, offset in part by additional royalties through opening up areas of the country to oil and gas drilling. The second reconciliation bill would then deal with the Trump tax cuts. While House leadership has been cool to a two-bill strategy—they think that taking away border funding as a carrot will make it harder to keep members on the tax bill—the Freedom Caucus endorsed the approach. But they don’t want energy or defense spending in the first bill, and they want it to be fully offset. In other words, the content of those two bills is up in the air, and this is the gang that can’t even decide on a Speaker.
I don’t think we’ll get an auto-January 6th, which would be deeply amusing. But the signs of another dysfunctional two years in Congress are all around. That doesn’t completely nullify what Trump can do—much of his agenda, like mass deportations and tariffs, will be carried out mostly unilaterally—but it does mean that a unified Democratic Party could make things very difficult for Republicans. Someone should tell that to Democrats!
