The year was 2015. House Speaker John A. Boehner (R-Ohio) was resigning under pressure from his right flank, and the GOP was struggling to find anyone who could gain the majority required to succeed him. The GOP ultimately convinced Rep. Paul D. Ryan (R-Wis.) to seek the post, reasoning — perhaps correctly — that he was the one man who could get enough votes from both the tea party and the more establishment wing of the party.
The scenario has parallels to what we see today, including the fact that the GOP passed over Rep.-elect Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) for the job, which it did during three consecutive ballots Tuesday. But there’s one key difference: It happened when the GOP had a much larger majority than it does today. In fact, its nearly 60-vote majority was the largest for the party since the Great Depression. And even with that, it labored to find an acceptable pick.
We’re about to find out whether the Republican Party can find someone — anyone — who can get the requisite votes, in a much more tenuous situation. It now has a mere 10-seat majority, and if all members vote, the speaker can shed only four from their party and still squeak by.
The result will say a lot about whether the Republican Party, which asks Americans to empower it to govern, can effectively govern itself.
McCarthy’s hopes appear to be dwindling. Not only did 19 Republicans vote against him on the first and second ballots, but the number grew slightly on the third, with rising star Rep.-elect Byron Donalds (R-Fla.) becoming the 20th vote against McCarthy and making a pragmatic case for trying to find an alternative. Things are trending in the wrong direction for McCarthy. (All elected members of the House keep the “elect” on their title for now, since no one has been sworn in.)
The last time a speaker race went to multiple ballots was 100 years ago, and the GOP also had a bigger majority then. We’re in such uncharted territory that it’s difficult to figure out what happens from here. But we can start by surmising whether McCarthy is (and was) a bad candidate for speaker — and whether there’s anybody out there who could bridge the divide in the party.
All of the readily apparent alternatives have drawbacks that could forfeit five or many more votes.
House GOP No. 2 Steve Scalise (R-La.) is the most obvious replacement and is more conservative than McCarthy, but he carries some of that same baggage with the House Freedom Caucus by virtue of serving in leadership. Rep.-elect Elise Stefanik (R-N.Y.), another member of leadership, could suffer under the same stigma — not to mention the more moderate past that predated her sudden MAGA conversion.
On the more conservative side, Rep.-elect Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) is at least the nominal McCarthy alternative (all 20 of the anti-McCarthy votes on the third ballot went for Jordan instead). But it’s not difficult to see moderates balking at installing Jordan as speaker, especially after the results of the 2022 election. A not-insignificant number of them might worry about installing a bomb-thrower in the historically staid role. (Speakers tend to be longtime members who are very policy-focused and can handle the complex politics of the House.)
There’s a compelling case to be made that Republicans need to look outside of their existing leadership for someone who could win over enough members from both sides. But each suggestion could still face some variation on the daunting math with which the insiders are grappling.
We and others have floated Rep.-elect Patrick T. McHenry (R-N.C.), who has straddled the leadership-vs.-rabble-rouser divide. But he could be tarred by the former, having served in the whipping operations of both Boehner and Ryan, who also fell somewhat out of favor with the Freedom Caucus. Now-former congressman Lee Zeldin (R-N.Y.) is another possibility some have mentioned; he has ties to the conservative wing, but also helped down-ballot New York Republicans with his 2022 gubernatorial campaign, and more-moderate members might reason that he would be a good thing for the party. Yet, the House has never chosen a nonmember for speaker, although it can.
Ultimately, it appears this process could be headed for a war of attrition — ending only when one side eventually proves more willing to cave somewhat on its priorities to settle the matter. And it would seem wise to bet on the Freedom Caucus holding strong.
This is a strategy the Freedom Caucus has courted in the recent past: wearing down the establishment until a still-very-conservative candidate starts to appear more palatable than before. Former Trump White House and Freedom Caucus aide Alyssa Farah Griffin tweeted Tuesday that this had been the plan ahead of the post-2016 election vote for speaker, when the Freedom Caucus grew disillusioned with Ryan and was going to pit him against Jordan to pave the way for another candidate. Then, Donald Trump was actually elected, and many people’s plans blew up.
Perhaps that’s the play here.
They have had something like this in mind for nearly a decade. The MarkMeadowsization of House Republican politics, still simmering long after his exit from the Hill. https://t.co/T48rN1JAWP
— Robert Costa (@costareports) January 3, 2023
But McCarthy and his allies have warned — conveniently but perhaps not entirely unreasonably — that this approach could drive some moderate Republicans to cross the aisle and join with Democrats to elect a relatively moderate Republican, if they decide the ultraconservatives are being unreasonable. Outgoing Rep. Fred Upton (R-Mich.), whose name has been bandied about, now says he’s open to such an arrangement. And while it’s self-serving for McCarthy allies to float this nightmare scenario so as to apply pressure on the Freedom Caucus, that outcome does feel more plausible when you need only five Republicans to join Democrats to make it happen.
Beyond that, there’s no assurance that there would be enough votes for whatever more-palatable conservative the Freedom Caucus might want ultimately to put up. Again, the narrow GOP majority cuts both ways — making it difficult to find a candidate who is good enough for both sides of the party to win with only Republican votes.
What happens next will depend largely on which candidates are put forward. There’s not a Paul D. Ryan out there, someone with huge stature — Ryan was a former vice-presidential nominee when he was elected speaker — and a demonstrated ability to appeal to both sides of the party.
And even if there was, it’s not clear that having those personal qualities would be enough in today’s political climate. After all, despite his consensus reputation, in his first election for speaker, Ryan still lost the votes of nine Republicans — about double what the next speaker can afford to lose if everyone votes.