What to make of Kev McCarthy’s troubled run for the Speakership? I continue to view this as a basically no-win situation for conservatives—at least for the short term. I suppose it’s possible that some good will come of it for the longer term, although I have great difficulty in articulating a plausible scenario in that regard. You can read about the runup to the election tomorrow:
Speakership In Major Doubt, McCarthy Caves On Key GOP Rebel Demand
However, McCarthy's concession and olive branch landed with something of a thud. Nine GOP reps who've yet to commit to McCarthy issued a statement saying that, while it represented "progress," "Mr McCarthy’s statement comes almost impossibly late to address continued deficiencies ahead of the opening of the 118th Congress on January 3rd...there continue to be missing specific commitments with respect to virtually every component of our entreaties."
I don’t see any scenario where I’d support Kevin McCarthy as House Speaker.
McCarthy has a track record of cutting backdoor deals with Democrats. pic.twitter.com/UzUz67yd7K— Rep Andy Biggs (@RepAndyBiggsAZ) December 29, 2022
Among the unacknowledged demands: Conservatives want a commitment that House leadership will not work to defeat them in party primaries.
Meanwhile, the Freedom Caucus has asked for rule changes that include:
Broader membership in the group that doles out committee assignments
Allowing committee members to choose their own chairs
Allowing amendments from the floor
Being given five days to review legislation before voting on it
Don Surber also weighs in:
Surber makes the conservative case against Kev—but omits to do the difficult part: Articulate the case for someone other than Kev. The closest he comes is to say, “Send in Steve Scalise or someone else who is less incompetent.” The problem with that lukewarm suggestion is that Scalise, incredibly, held out in support of Liz Cheney even longer than Kev. Another name that’s being bandied about is that of the personable Jim Jordan. But Jordan, too, has proven in the past to be a weak reed in important respects—including reining in Big Tech’s assault on basic American freedoms. There just doesn’t seem to be any credible choice.
Surber does end his post with this:
Conservatives have elected Republicans to repeal Obamacare and to build a wall. Republicans failed. Denying McCarthy the speakership would send a message to Republicans in Washington to do as we say, not as the lobbyists dictate.
But Washington failed to get the message from the Tea Party or Donald Trump.
Maybe. I wish I could be even a bit upbeat.
There is the possibility that the Republicans who object to the MAGA ascendancy would elect a Democrat to be House Speaker. After all, these RINOs would lose power either way, but would keep their insider influence should a Democrat be elected.
"Among the unacknowledged demands: Conservatives want a commitment that House leadership will not work to defeat them in party primaries. "
I take this as evidence that conservatives have learned nothing. Such a promise is unenforceable. To quote Frodo, "There's no promise you can make that I can trust." So what do they plan to do? Make McCarthy swear on the Precious? Even a promise that Republicans could call a vote of confidence is meaningless. Most of the GOP contingent in the House supports McCarthy and would likely continue to do so. Put him in as Speaker and he can't, as a practical matter, be removed.