Connect with us

Congress

Mike Johnson sticks to no-show shutdown strategy as resistance mounts

Published

on

For Mike Johnson, not showing up is the entire battle.

The speaker made clear Thursday — eight days into the government shutdown — he is committed to keeping the House out of session as long as it takes to pressure Senate Democrats to act on the stopgap funding bill his chamber passed three weeks ago.

Johnson is holding firm on the indefinite recess strategy even as pressure mounts inside his own conference to bring members back to Washington, with more and more GOP lawmakers prodding him to change course.

“There is absolutely no reason for the House to be out of session — it’s embarrassing,” Rep. Kevin Kiley (R-Calif.) said in an interview. “The government is shut down, Americans are losing access to critical services, workers are being furloughed and the House isn’t even in Washington.”

Dozens of House Republicans are begging Johnson to reconvene the House to advance a standalone bill to pay troops during the shutdown, so active-duty servicemembers don’t miss their paychecks Oct. 15. That includes Rep. Elise Stefanik of New York — a member of Johnson’s own leadership team.

Senior House Republicans and leadership aides are mindful of the growing unrest. But they fear the alternative: Bringing members back to Washington without a resolution to the shutdown in hand, they believe, would invite chaos.

“We’d have people tearing each other from limb to limb,” said one senior GOP aide granted anonymity to speak candidly about internal party thinking.

Johnson, who clashed in the hallway this week with two Democratic senators over the shutdown, acknowledged those concerns Thursday.

“Emotions are high. People are upset — I’m upset,” he said. “Is it better for them, probably, to be physically separated right now? Yeah, it probably is, frankly.”

GOP leaders have drawn a hard line on a variety of tactics their members have proposed. But some in the GOP who were already wary of the looming troop pay deadline were rattled by the speaker’s remarkable C-SPAN exchange with a Republican military mom Thursday morning, in which she begged him to advance the standalone troop pay bill, warning her medically fragile children “could die.”

“I don’t think it’s going to be any consolation to members of our military who miss paychecks to say, ‘Oh well, it is the Senate’s fault,’” Kiley said.

But Johnson counseled Republicans to say exactly that in a private call Thursday, saying the best message would be to tell voters “we’ve done our job” and now the onus is on Senate Democrats to reopen the government.

One option being pushed by the group concerned about troop pay is to try to pass that legislation by unanimous consent on the floor during Friday’s pro forma session, which would not require calling members back to Washington.

“If we have a way to make sure our troops get their paychecks, we should pursue that,” Kiley said.

GOP Reps. Jay Obernolte of California and Julie Fedorchak of North Dakota warned the speaker directly on the Thursday call about the political fallout of keeping the House in recess as the Senate standoff continues.

At least one Senate Republican shared that sentiment: “I think you’ve got to be here,” Sen. Thom Tillis of North Carolina said. “The leadership of the House and other members, I think they should be here.”

But some in the House GOP fired back across the Capitol, arguing Senate Republicans should simply go “nuclear” and change their chamber’s rules to pass the House continuing resolution with a simple majority vote.

“You need to get rid of this cloture vote so you can do what the American people want us to do,” Rep. John Rutherford (R-Fla.) said. Senate Majority Leader John Thune ruled out that possibility Thursday.

The back-and-forth among Republicans underscored the risks for Johnson of bringing all 432 members back to town. Not only would he have to contend with a barrage of potential off-message comments about the shutdown, he would have to tackle the Jeffrey Epstein saga — with his promised swearing-in of Rep.-elect Adelita Grijalva (D-Ariz.) likely forcing a long-awaited floor vote on the late sex offender.

Rutherford is one of many rank-and-file House Republicans who are backing up Johnson’s strategy, arguing there’s no reason at the moment to bring members back. Rutherford, a GOP appropriator, said “there’s nothing to do.” That includes the nine fiscal 2026 appropriations bills the House still needs to pass — because, he said, lawmakers have not yet reached a topline agreement with the Senate on how much those bills will spend.

But then there is Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.), a MAGA stalwart who has taken the rare step of openly bashing Johnson’s strategy — and backing up Democrats’ focus on an impending health care “crisis.” Her critical comments have incensed many of the speaker’s leadership allies and rank-and-file Republicans alike.

“I’m not putting the blame” on President Donald Trump, she said in a BLN interview Thursday. “I’m actually putting the blame on the speaker and Leader Thune in the Senate. This should not be happening.”

Trump’s interests, however, continue complicating matters for Republicans on Capitol Hill. While Johnson and Thune try to pin servicemembers’ potential missed Oct. 15 paychecks on Democrats, the president has publicly promised this week that he wouldn’t let troops go unpaid. White House officials privately say they are considering how to shift funds to ensure the checks go out.

One Senate Republican said Thursday night their understanding for now is “the White House is going to take care of it.”

GOP leadership circles have been increasingly frustrated by the White House position, according to three people granted anonymity to discuss private sentiments. But among those House Republicans supporting White House action include Rep. Mike Bost of Illinois, the Veterans Affairs Committee chair.

“If we find that there’s a way that the administration can do it, then more power to them,” said Bost. “But right now, [Democrats] all of a sudden, asking us to take a vote we’ve already made three weeks ago makes no sense.”

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Congress

Brian Fitzpatrick delivers a warning on GOP reconciliation redo

Published

on

As House Republicans start to dream big about another party-line bill, one key member who voted down the last GOP reconciliation bill is warning his colleagues not to count on his support.

Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick (R-Pa.) referenced his vote last summer against the “big, beautiful bill” in an interview Thursday and suggested he was prepared to oppose another GOP-only bill if it, too, includes spending cuts he opposes to social programs.

“You saw what I did on the first reconciliation bill,” Fitzpatrick said. Fitzpatrick and just one more House Republican could be enough to tank a party-line package given Speaker Mike Johnson’s slim majority.

Still, many of Fitzpatrick’s colleagues are making plans for an expansive new GOP-only bill that would include more money for Homeland Security operations, Iran war funding and other cost-of-living priorities, while demanding it be fully offset with spending cuts — possibly from social programs targeted for “fraud prevention.”

“You never say ‘never’ at anything, but I’m never a fan of single-party bills,” Fitzpatrick said. “That’s just my approach to government.”

Continue Reading

Congress

Joe Wilson hospitalized

Published

on

Rep. Joe Wilson (R-S.C.) was hospitalized after falling in his home on Wednesday evening.

Wilson’s office said on Thursday that the 78-year-old is fine and working remotely.

“Last evening, Congressman Wilson slipped in the bathroom of his residence in Washington and cut his head,” David Snider, a spokesperson for Wilson, said in a statement. “He received stitches, is fine, and working remotely.”

Continue Reading

Congress

‘You lose your credibility’: Democrats warn against turning a blind eye to a colleague’s misconduct

Published

on

House Democrats will soon have to choose between protecting an embattled colleague or insulating themselves from politically damaging accusations of hypocrisy.

The House Ethics Committee will begin the process Thursday of determining whether Rep. Sheila Cherfilus-McCormick warrants punishment as extreme as expulsion over accusations that she stole millions in FEMA funds and committed various campaign finance infractions.

The bipartisan panel that typically operates in secret is holding a public “trial” — the first in nearly 16 years — that will litigate those allegations as the third-term Florida Democrat faces federal criminal charges in her home state. Cherfilus-McCormick has maintained her innocence, saying “the full facts will make clear I did nothing wrong.”

House Democratic leaders have so far taken a hands-off approach to the saga.

Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries and his office say that Cherfilus-McCormick is “entitled to her day in court and the presumption of innocence,” and Caucus Chair Pete Aguilar of California told reporters Wednesday he also would not “prejudge any outcome” of the Ethics Committee’s proceedings.

But after Democrats agitated for the removal of serial fraudster Rep. George Santos of New York ahead of a full Ethics process in 2023, the party could be vulnerable to political attacks if it doesn’t now police a credibly accused embezzler in its own midst.

“If they give us conclusions that this actually happened, and there’s no question of doubt as to the fact that laws were broken, then our colleague will have to face the consequences of that — it’s plain and simple,” said Rep. Stephen Lynch (D-Mass.) in an interview.

“You lose your credibility if you’re applying a different set of laws and a different standard to people of the other party,” he said. “I mean, how could we ever justify anything we do if we only apply that to Republicans, and we don’t follow the law?”

Rep. Becca Balint (D-Vt.) said her party has to be mindful of how voters perceive corruption in Washington.

“I think there’s pressure on all of us in elected office right now,” she said in an interview. “Neither party is trusted by the public that we’re going to fight corruption. … I know from talking with my own constituents that this is a real issue for both parties, not just Republicans.”

These warnings come as Democrats have repeatedly over the past several months declined to punish their own members as they faced allegations of wrongdoing. They restored Rep. Henry Cuellar of Texas to his post as the senior Democrat on the Homeland Security Appropriations subcommittee after he received a pardon by President Donald Trump; he had taken a leave of absence while being scrutinized for allegations of bribery.

Most looked the other way when retiring Rep. Chuy García of Illinois boxed out other potential successors and orchestrated his chief of staff’s ascension to succeed him. And they helped Del. Stacey Plaskett of the Virgin Islands dodge a Republican-led censure attempt following revelations she had texted convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein during an Oversight Committee hearing.

Now they’ll have to decide what to do about Cherfilus-McCormick.

A House Ethics subcommittee will meet Thursday afternoon to consider a motion for summary judgment — in effect, whether or not to declare her guilty. If it does, the full panel will schedule a hearing for a later date to determine what punishment to recommend, and the House will then vote to execute it.

Members of the subcommittee could suggest something as minor, though embarrassing, as a reprimand or censure. It could also call for her expulsion. House GOP leaders believe they will have the requisite two-thirds majority to expel Cherfilus-McCormick and plan to force such a vote, according to three people granted anonymity to speak candidly about top House Republicans’ plans. But leaders are waiting to see what the panel recommends at the conclusion of the trial.

In a statement Wednesday, Cherfilus-McCormick said she was “innocent” and a “fighter,” and she criticized the Ethics Committee for proceeding with the trial despite her request for a delay that would give “my legal team reasonable time to prepare.” The committee already delayed the trial once after Cherfilus-McCormick lost her representation.

“I urge the Committee to follow its own precedents and uphold fairness and not allow this process to be driven by politics or numbers,” she said.

Santos is the most recent member of Congress to be expelled for using campaign donations for personal expenses — an action his colleagues took after the Ethics Committee issued a report substantiating the claims against him but before it could hold a trial and recommend punishment.

“Some of my Republican colleagues thought it was premature. They thought that he should have gotten a trial before we expelled him,” said Rep. Nick LaLota (R-N.Y.), who pushed for Santos’ removal from office. “I always said that he admitted to the very thing we were accusing him of was enough process — enough due process — to throw him out.”

Cherfilus-McCormick, in contrast, is pleading not guilty — which LaLota suggested could give Democrats some political cover to give her the benefit of the doubt. He added, however, “The accusations are totally gross. Kind of looks like she did it.”

The last time the House Ethics Committee held a formal trial was in 2010 for the late-Rep. Charlie Rangel (D-N.Y.), who was ultimately censured for a vast range of violations, including tax evasion.

Ethics Committee Chair Michael Guest (R-Miss.) said his panel has been reviewing the Rangel proceedings as a guide for how to approach the Cherfilus-McCormick trial, saying the committee intends to “follow the map that has been laid out in the previous hearings.”

But the Rangel episode was also a deeply emotional and uncomfortable situation for many of the beloved veteran lawmaker’s peers, with Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.), who was the chair of the Ethics Committee at that time, recalling in an interview that it was “a very depressing experience.”

Some House Democrats are now struggling with the uncomfortable task of having to potentially render career-ending judgment on a colleague.

“She’s a dear friend,” said Rep. Sydney Kamlager-Dove (D-Calif.). “I am waiting, I think, like everyone else, to see how all of this plays out in court. That’s something that we all have the benefit of getting. I think you are innocent until proven guilty.”

Meredith Lee Hill contributed to this report.

Continue Reading

Trending