Connect with us

Congress

Under Mike Johnson, a rarely used House tool has gone mainstream

Published

on

Over the course of decades, House lawmakers had succeeded only a few times in triggering votes on bills the chamber’s leaders refused to call up.

Then Mike Johnson became speaker.

On the Louisiana Republican’s watch, the “discharge petition” has caught fire. Rank-and-file lawmakers have managed five times since he won his gavel two years ago to circumvent Johnson’s wishes by getting the 218 signatures needed to force votes on legislation he had blocked — more than in the prior 30 years combined.

Most recently, a bipartisan group used the maneuver to advance a long-stalled bill requiring President Donald Trump’s administration to release information about the late convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.

It’s members of Johnson’s own party who have most effectively wielded the tool in recent years. Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) masterminded the Epstein push, while Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (R-Fla.) engineered an effort to seek voting accommodations for House members with newborn babies. Before that, then-Rep. Garret Graves (R-La.) used the gambit to enact a bill to expand Social Security payments for millions of public sector workers.

“They try to say that discharge petitions are a tool of the minority, but that’s actually only the perspective of people that want to consolidate power within leadership,” Luna said in an interview, adding that she would protect the maneuver “with every bone in my body.”

The upshot for Johnson is that the arcane legislative mechanism once known only to Capitol Hill obsessives is now a routine part of life in the Republican House majority. Beyond Epstein, Johnson is now facing several new drumbeats for action, with lawmakers looking to force votes on banning member stock trading, sanctioning Russia and extending health care subsidies that are set to expire at year’s end.

The GOP’s slim majority is an obvious contributor to the burgeoning popularity of the maneuver. The discharge process is set into motion when 218 members sign on to a petition, meaning only a handful of Republicans need to cross leadership if Democrats are united in support.

But the recent spate of successful discharges also reflects careful groundwork Democrats laid to quickly seize on the procedure, along with a sentiment among many Republicans that Johnson is stifling the will of the House to appease Trump and small GOP factions — including hard-liners who successfully ousted Johnson’s predecessor, Kevin McCarthy.

“I would encourage you to ask Mike Johnson why he repeatedly refused to bring my bill to the floor,” Rep. Greg Steube (R-Fla.) said in an interview.

‘Toxic political environment’

Steube is still bitter about how Johnson hindered passage last year of his legislation to provide tax relief to disaster survivors, even after the measure was unanimously approved in committee. Once Steube got the signatures he needed to compel floor action, the measure passed the House in a 382-7 vote before clearing the Senate and earning then-President Joe Biden’s signature.

That first victory — seven months into Johnson’s tenure as speaker — showed how the maneuver can be successful “in a toxic political environment,” said Steube, a MAGA-hat-wearing, fourth-term member who has consistently won his southwest Florida district by a landslide. “It’s got to be something that is very bipartisan and is important enough that the body says, Yeah, this warrants overriding the speaker.”

Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (R-Fla.) completed one discharge petition and is now threatening another.

The discharge petition dates back to 1910, when it was created in response to the “overreaching, overbearing, overcontrolling” style of then-Speaker Joseph Cannon — aka “Czar Cannon” — according to Sarah Binder, a George Washington University professor who focuses on legislative politics.

Now, she said, it serves as a “pressure valve” for a chamber designed to reflect the majority’s will.

In some cases, discharge petitions can help solve thorny political problems for the speaker. Philip Wallach, who studies the roots of congressional dysfunction at the right-leaning American Enterprise Institute, said Johnson is “using this idea of getting forced” as a way to keep his job.

“He’s actually kind of deft at the coalition management problem and at staying on side with Trump,” Wallach said. “If he acted some other way, I really do think there’s a good chance that he would find himself on the wrong side of Trump and get thrown out.”

That was certainly the case with the Epstein vote, though Johnson protested mightily against the bill Massie and his ally Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) sought to discharge, arguing until the moment Trump signed it that it did not do enough to protect Epstein’s victims from invasions of privacy.

But as the 427-1 vote demonstrated, there was a deep groundswell for transparency that Johnson had been holding off at Trump’s behest.

‘The fuse in the fuse box’

Massie said members of both parties are now “brainstorming” other bills they might be able to catapult to the floor.

“It’s the fuse in the fuse box when everything gets jammed up and the wires get crossed and nothing can get done,” he told reporters last week.

In discouraging Republicans from signing on to discharge petitions, House GOP leaders argue that the tactic undermines the party in power and circumvents Congress’ “regular order” system of debate, where legislation is meant to advance through committees with special expertise.

“Typically it’s when somebody either doesn’t want to go through the committee process or doesn’t get what they want out of the committee process,” House Majority Leader Steve Scalise (R-La.) said in an interview.

But it’s not just committee calendars and floor scheduling that has chafed many House Republicans. GOP leaders have taken more overt steps this year to thwart the chamber’s ability to work the majority’s will — including by preemptively blocking efforts to force votes on canceling some of Trump’s tariffs.

After success with the Epstein bill, Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) says he's brainstorming other bipartisan measures to discharge.

Even before Johnson’s tenure, House leaders of both parties have chipped away at the “open rule” practice of allowing lawmakers to debate any amendments they wanted on the floor. Now they nearly always pick and choose the amendments allowed — if they allow them at all.

On the Epstein bill, the House’s top Republicans characterized the decision to sign Massie’s petition as a loyalty test.

“They made it pretty clear that if you get on the discharge petition, you’ve declared war on the president, in so many words,” Rep. Don Bacon (R-Neb.) said in an interview, adding that he sympathized with Johnson’s need to keep Trump and “prima donnas” in the House GOP happy.

“He tries his best,” Bacon said.

But Bacon, who is retiring after his term ends, has signed on to several discharge petitions, including one to sanction Russia and aid Ukraine, which is just a few signatures shy of 218. Bacon reasons that gesture is a way to show Trump that there’s rising support for helping Ukraine while affording Johnson some political cover.

“I feel like I’m helping him out by doing the discharge on Ukraine, in a way,” Bacon said of Johnson. “Because I’m trying to force the hand. He’s going to say, ‘I didn’t have any choice on this.’”

‘Zombie’ legislation

Democrats, to be sure, have done their share to contribute to the dizzying pace of discharges. Just last week, another petition succeeded, setting up a vote on a measure sponsored by Rep. Jared Golden (D-Maine) that would nullify an executive order Trump issued in March scrapping the collective bargaining rights of more than 1 million federal employees.

The party’s leaders, in fact, have quietly plotted for months to take full advantage of the tool. Under House rules, it typically takes well over a month to force a vote once a petition gets the requisite 218 signatures. So Massachusetts Rep. Jim McGovern, the top Democrat on the House Rules Committee, coordinated the filing of “zombie” measures containing placeholder language allowing members to jump-start the procedural countdown before they finalize the substance of the legislation they want to propel to the floor.

Rep. Jim McGovern (D-Mass.) engineered a strategy to use discharge petitions more quickly.

McGovern acknowledged in an interview that none of that spade work pays off unless at least a few members of the majority are disgruntled enough to buck their leaders.

“It takes a lot of courage for Republicans to sign on to a discharge petition when they’re in charge,” he said. “But I think it’s a reflection of their frustration with their own leadership.”

Off Blue Light News, congressional observers who know the history of the seldom-used gambit are stunned, if not necessarily surprised, by its recent success.

“Despite the fact that it doesn’t succeed very often, it’s out there for an ambitious, organized minority — and, in this case, also disgruntled or concerned majority members, who feel their leadership’s not on the right side of the issue,” Binder said. “So beware the discharge.”

Cassandra Dumay contributed to this report.

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

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

Congress

GOP senators urge Trump to find Iran exit plan as energy prices rise: ‘The clock is ticking’

Published

on

President Donald Trump promised a quick end to the war in Iran, but the ongoing conflict has kept energy costs high — and some Senate Republicans are starting to go public with their concerns.

GOP lawmakers who already feared November would be an increasingly tough battle are trying to nudge the president toward clearly defining his endgame after a surge in oil, gas and fertilizer prices. Trump warned the sticker shock might not completely recede by the time the November elections roll around, though news Friday that the Strait of Hormuz would reopen could begin to bring some relief if the agreement sticks.

Several GOP senators are warning the president could face growing pushback, including them not supporting military action against Iran after the conflict hits the 60-day mark at the end of the month, if he doesn’t articulate his plan. The White House could try to invoke a 30-day extension for national security reasons.

“I hope that we are arriving at an exit strategy here to bring this to a close to preserve our security interests and bring down the cost of gasoline,” Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) told reporters this week, adding that the “clock is ticking” on the war.

Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) said in an interview that she and a group of other senators are in the process of drafting an authorization for the use of military force against Iran, which would lay out when and how Trump could use force. She pointed to the 60-day threshold as a possible deadline for hammering out text, saying it would be “helpful” for it to be done by then.

Even senior Republicans are warning that if the administration wants Congress to greenlight tens of billions in additional war funding, Republicans are going to need to know more about the president’s ultimate Iran strategy beforehand.

“I think our members are going to be very interested in what next steps are,” said Senate Majority Leader John Thune, predicting that the administration’s forthcoming Iran war spending ask “will be an important inflection point if and when the administration submits their request.”

Thune, like most congressional Republicans, has been supportive of the administration’s Iran campaign but said the impact on gas and fertilizer prices is “a big deal” back in his home state of South Dakota.

“We’re in planting season so if you didn’t buy fertilizer ahead of time, you’re really feeling it, and obviously fuel is a critically important part of production, agriculture,” Thune said this week, prior to the Strait’s reopening.

Retiring Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) predicted his party would ultimately keep the Senate majority, but said the Iran war and the related spike in pricing could be a drag when they are already facing “headwinds.”

“The president has to help us get the vote out,” Tillis said. “But the base alone is not going to be able to do it. The way we’re going to get the other ones is addressing the energy challenges, particularly the price at the pump and some of the other affordability issues.”

Sen. Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.), in an interview before Friday’s announcement, predicted that prices would come down after the strait’s reopening and that it would matter the most in September, when swing voters start tuning in for the midterms.

“If we’re going into September and, even more, October … with super high — you know gas prices over $4 — I mean it’s going to be a problem,” Cramer said.

There were early signs of celebration from Senate Republicans Friday over the announcement that the strait had reopened, even if it’s potentially only temporarily.

“Very glad to hear the Strait of Hormuz is open, at least for the remainder of the ceasefire,” Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) wrote on X.

Sen. Bernie Moreno (R-Ohio), also took a victory lap: “Will Dems be making comments about the massive drop in oil prices?” he asked.

Trump has suggested that he is eager to negotiate a deal to end the conflict. And GOP lawmakers have largely deferred to Trump so far — including defeating attempts in both chambers this week to limit the president’s ability to carry out additional military action without Congress.

But even with oil shipments through the strait set to resume now, some Republicans say generally, they want to see the president focusing more on affordability issues.

“I would like to see the president spend 70 percent of his time talking about all the things that we and he have done to reduce the cost of living and 30 percent of his time on other important stuff,” Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.) said in an interview.

Continue Reading

Congress

GOP hard-liners threaten to tank FISA vote

Published

on

House GOP hardliners are threatening to tank the FISA rule shortly on the House floor as Speaker Mike Johnson tries to force through a five year extension, according to four people granted anonymity to speak about plans not yet public.

They’re livid over the “inexplicable 5 year extension, the fake warrant requirement, and the walk back of the promise from this afternoon to include CBDC,” according to one of the people, referring negotiations to prohibit a central bank digital currency.

Continue Reading

Congress

‘The original sin:’ Hill Republicans blame White House for slow-walking FISA sales pitch

Published

on

A messy GOP battle over a key government spy authority boiled over in the House this week — but the crisis was months in the making.

White House officials and Republican Hill leaders have tried to pressure GOP hard-liners into approving a clean, 18-month extension of Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act that President Donald Trump demanded. But amid a GOP rebellion on Capitol Hill, Speaker Mike Johnson Thursday afternoon punted a vote on the measure for the second day in a row.

The program expires Monday night. Senators went home for the weekend as Johnson continued to pursue a compromise with the holdouts for an extension as long as three years with reforms, and raced to hold a vote.

Now, the finger-pointing among Republicans is rampant and temperatures are running high.

A band of House ultraconservatives — who have long been concerned that warrantless government surveillance of foreign individuals could sweep up data on Americans — shot down Trump and GOP leaders’ long-held plans for the 18-month extension with no reforms earlier this week.

“A clean extension ain’t going to move on the floor,” Rep. Chip Roy of Texas, one of the head House GOP holdouts, warned earlier this week.

In interviews with more than two dozen Republican lawmakers and aides on Capitol Hill involved in the talks, many of whom were granted anonymity to speak freely about the contentious policy debate, the consensus is that the White House is largely responsible for the current breakdown as GOP factions snipe and assign blame.

“This is why we shouldn’t wait until the last minute on these things,” one House Republican fumed Thursday. A congressional GOP aide added, “The White House was too late to come to a decision. That was the original sin.”

A senior White House official disputed the characterization from some Hill Republicans that the administration had taken too long to plead their case. They pointed to a briefing in the Situation Room months ago with Republican lawmakers, during which “the president heard arguments on both sides of the issue.”

The official added, “We’ve had multiple briefings from senior officials, both on the House and Senate side, about the desirability of this program. Again, going back months ago.”

Trump told House Intelligence Chair Rick Crawford (R-Ark.) and House Judiciary Chair Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) that he wanted a clean extension, without reforms, in February. The president arrived at this position, a second White House official said, after “the administration completed a policy process through the interagency and advised POTUS that a clean extension was the best course and solicited views on length from Blue Light News.”

There was also coordination between the White House and Capitol Hill, according to three people familiar and the senior White House official: Johnson requested the reauthorization run for 18 months, and Trump agreed.

The administration succeeded in convincing Jordan, who had previously pushed for changes to Section 702, to publicly support a clean extension following a White House meeting on the subject.

But ultraconservatives on Capitol Hill were harder to convince, with some House Republicans correctly predicting two months ago they were going to have issues as the vote drew nearer. Trump has forced those hard-liners to cave in recent months on other fights, but the spy powers legislation was one area where members have not been as willing to relent.

While Trump officials made outreach to members at least two months ago, Hill engagement ramped up in the days leading up to the scheduled vote. That has included appeals to lawmakers from CIA Director John Ratcliffe, Deputy CIA Director Michael Ellis and Joint Chiefs Chair Gen. Dan Caine, according to five people. Ellis has made personal phone calls to members, according to two people familiar with the pressure campaign.

White House deputy chief of staff James Blair, White House Legislative Affairs chief James Braid and other legislative affairs officials have also been calling individual House Republicans and working through negotiation details, according to six other people with direct knowledge of the conversations.

Noticeably absent from this outreach is Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard. Her office plays a statutory role in overseeing Section 702 and has historically been a key proponent of the powerful spy powers.

Gabbard in early February expressed concerns to Trump about reauthorizing the statute without additional privacy guardrails, as Blue Light News reported earlier Thursday, though her appeal appears to have been unsuccessful.

And while the administration’s position on Section 702 came into focus in February, there were signs earlier in the month that its position had not fully crystallized. Officials meeting with the Senate Intelligence Committee at that time refused to divulge the White House’s stance on extending the surveillance power and adding reforms, according to five people with knowledge of the meeting. The exchange frustrated Republicans and Democrats on the panel, who are generally supportive of the surveillance program.

Due to a quirk in the law, the administration will still be able to operate the program for nearly a year even if it is not renewed, and privacy advocates have argued that Monday is a false deadline. But without the law on the books, communications providers like Google and AT&T, which the government tasks to surveil foreign messages, could stop complying with those orders.

But White House officials want an extension codified now, all the same. They have been arguing in conversations with lawmakers that the country is at war and national security is paramount amid threats from Iran. Therefore, they say, hardliners should fall in line to back the clean extension without delay, according to five people involved in the conversations.

“The program is critical for the United States military to listen to the conversations of foreign terrorists abroad while we are engaged in a military operation in Iran. That’s what we’ve been telling individuals, as well as the elevated threat levels around the world, as well as the threat from Mexican drug cartels,” the senior White House official said.

Two groups of House GOP hard-liners, after being summoned by Trump Tuesday night, met with officials at the White House. But some of the Republicans declined the invitation.“I’ve heard everything that the executive has to say on FISA,” Freedom Caucus Chair Andy Harris (R-Md.) said in an interview that evening. That meeting, however, marked a shift: Those House Republicans who went to the White House alongside GOP leaders — among them Roy and Reps. Keith Self of Texas, Byron Donalds of Florida, Clay Higgins of Louisiana, Morgan Griffith of Virginia and Warren Davidson of Ohio — took the opportunity to begin negotiations about a framework for a possible agreement around the use of warrants to access certain information.

The discussions included how the White House and GOP leadership needed to make good on a months-old promise to advance legislation that would ban a central bank digital currency. Enough House GOP holdouts late Thursday evening were threatening to still tank the procedural vote to advance the extension if the White House didn’t address the digital currency matter, according to four people with direct knowledge of the matter. “Unless it’s included, there’s enough votes to kill the rule,” Rep. Ralph Norman (R-S.C.) said in an interview Thursday afternoon. But other Republicans, White House officials and Senate GOP leadership are warning that attaching the measure directly would tank the FISA bill.

In exchange for making these concessions, GOP leaders and the White House have been pushing for a Section 702 extension that’s longer than 18 months and closer to three years.

The senior White House official also said Thursday the administration has “focused in on potentially having conversations about reforms to the program that we think would strengthen protections for American civil liberties … those conversations are ongoing.”

Jordan, meanwhile, has been helping build support for a clean extension by privately telling some Republicans that, if they can pass this 18-month clean extension now, they could potentially work on warrant reforms later, according to three people with direct knowledge of the discussions. That’s raised some eyebrows internally among House Republicans.

The House delays are leaving barely any time for the Senate to act. Majority Leader John Thune said in an interview Thursday that he’s already started having conversations with his own members about what they would need to clear a FISA extension Monday.

Ultimately, even if GOP leaders strike a deal on changes to the current proposed extension, it could risk support for reauthorization among key Democrats, who Republicans will need to pass the final legislation in a narrowly-divided House. While some House Democrats are expected to help Republicans get the final bill across the finish line — including top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, Rep. Jim Himes of Connecticut — Democratic leaders have so far declined to shore up the votes for any fast-tracked process.

“I am deeply skeptical of a straightforward extension,” House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries said Thursday, adding he told Johnson a few days ago there was “great Democratic skepticism” on a clean extension.

One Democratic Hill aide said Johnson and Trump did far too little to coordinate their pitch with Democrats, who carried a razor-thin vote to re-up the law in 2024.

“They never came to us,” the aide said.

Continue Reading

Trending