John Boehner on the GOP

Jason Chaffetz on Life

Political pundits between the beltways were somewhat shocked to hear that five term Congressman Jason Chaffetz (R-UT 3rd) had decided not to run for another term.  Chaffetz had gained prominence becoming the House Government Reform Committee Chair, and had quixotically threw his hat in the ring in October 2015 when former Speaker John Boehner (R-OH 8th) was ousted from the Speaker's chair, What was more jarring was the fact that Chaffetz suggested that he might not finish out his term. 

Since the fifty year old Rep. Chaffetz is politically youthful and ambitious, some have suggested that he is making this move to earn some good money for his family before launching a gubernatorial campaign in Utah in 2020.  Others have worried that deep state intelligence agencies have something on him.  After all, the Secret Service leaked embarrassing employment information which Obama Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson had to apologize for in 2015 

On Boehner's Diabolic Diatribe Against Cruz

When speaking before an audience in Stanford University,  ex Speaker of the House John Boehner excoriated Republican Presidential hopeful Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) by calling him an SOB and comparing him with the Prince of Darkness.  While at the same time, Boehner admitted that he was a texting and golfing buddy of GOP Presidential front-runner Donald Trump.

Delving deeper into this devilish diatribe, it is easy to understand Boehner's bad-mouthng comes as no surprise.

Boehner was a quintessential Cocktail Party Republican.  Boehner first joined the House in 1991 so he had an establishment bent,, albeit not to personally include earmarks. By the time Boehner ascended into leadership roles for House Republicans, the party's power waned so it was important to go along to get along. This modus operendi was complicated by the advent of the Tea Party, which wanted to have constitutional rule of law, smaller government and fighting for your principles.

In September 2013, Senator Ted Cruz gave a 21 hour filibuster to fight for Obamacare changes in the Continuing Resolution.  Boehner bristled at the resulting government shutdown but spun it to point out that the Obama Administration would not compromise.



The reality is that Cruz exposed the game.  Boehner wanted to usher in a Continuing Resolution which might have some limitations to Obamacare, but when it would be excised in Conference Committee before going to President Obama, Boehner could confidentially vote against the CR and claim that he fought for conservative principles. In essence, Boehner was willing to feign fighting without giving a flying flip about winning but then embrace compromise as a part of politics.

The other admission that the former Speaker made was that Boehner was a texting and golf buddy of the Donald. Washington Post Congressional reporter Paul Kane assessed that Boehner was ousted as Speaker by House Conservatives who: "a country club Republican who loved to play 18 holes of golf and drink merlot afterward while cutting deals." So someone who loved to cut deals amongst the establishment in the Cocktail Party would naturally recoil against a confrontational style of upstarts like Cruz who are principled and willing to fight.

Although Trump's over the top rhetoric during the campaign contrasts with Boehner's generally easy-going style, both relish in deal making, especially with the establishment. While in Congress, Boehner chaffed at inserting earmarks.  It will be curious if that resolution holds when former Members are allowed to lobby their former fellow lawmakers. Of course, Boehner may enjoy hitting the links at Doral Park. Maybe Boehner can improve his orange complexion along with Trump.

John Boehner on Catholic Guilt

It is dubious whether Boehner's pile of Catholic guilt was the deciding factor in new House Speaker Paul D. Ryan's decision making but the State of the Union episode illustrates the Ignatian admonition about discernment. Manipulating someone in order to escape a hard fate certainly seems like some bad spirits. 

Perusing the Political Pumpkin Patch

The Jack-O'-Lantern is a Halloween tradition associated with the strange flickering lights over peat bogs thought to made by will-the-wisps or Jack-O'-Lanterns. To emulate this flickering light, the flesh of a pumpkin is scooped out and an image, which is usually comical or grotesque, is carved out on the gourd. 

Pumpkin carving can be traced to the mid-nineteenth century in American and the British Isles. But today, pumpkin carving is not confined to crudely hewn scary faces for Halloween. This allows folk artists with stencils to create all sorts of scary countenances and images from the political pumpkin patch. While most of these carvings depict faces, some renditions are more conceptual.

The President is often a subject for pumpkin portraits.

But a lame duck President like Barack Obama just may not be scary anymore. Or more likely, we have to live the nightmare not vex over it. 

Partisans may create Jack-O'-Lanterns to depict their favored party in a positive light.

Top contenders from the Presidential nomination often get the pumpkin carving treatment.  Former First Lady/Senator/Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-AR NY)  seems to be a favorite to depict for both supporters and detractors.  

Surprisingly, cursory searches could not find carvings of Hillary clad in more Halloween attire.

Socialist Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT), the other leading contender in the Democrat primaries, also had many depictions in pumpkins.  

It took twelve hours for that folk artist to carve the pumpkin homage to Sanders. Many progressive Jack-O'-Lanterns may also  "Feel the Bern".

There was a curious quirk among Republican pumpkin carvings.  Logic would lead one to believe that the most popular candidates would be more likely to be popular carvings.  But it there is nary a carving to be found of current frontrunner Dr. Ben Carson.  

Could this be because the Seventh Day Adventist Church frowns on Halloween for occult associations?  Not very likely.  A more reasonable explanation is that Jack-O'-Lanterns traditionally depict comical or monstrous images.  Opponents may disagree with Dr. Carson but his characteristic soft spoken and thoughtful delivery makes it difficult to demonize.

On the other hand, there were plenty of Jack-O'-Lantern depictions of  strong second place challenger for the Republican Presidential nomination--Donald Trump. 

While this rendition of "The Donald" was colorful and employed multi-media, it only merited fifth place in the Oklahoma State Fair.  It would be a huuuuuge mistake to associate "The Donald" with anything but the best.  So a more traditional pumpkin carving is in order.

Although I suspect that stencils may be out there, it was hard to find carvings for Gov, Jeb! Bush (R-FL) or Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL). And the carving for Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) paled in comparison to his eminence during the GOP CNBC Debate.

By this time next year, as we will be in the culmination of the Election 2016 campaign cycle, there this little doubt that there will be many more adorned gourds in the political pumpkin patch 

As Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI 1st) has become speaker of the House, there was no need for the Boehner-O'-Lantern

Too many knives seemed to have spoiled the Jack-O'-Lantern.

What Makes for a Good Speaker?

After four and a half years as Speaker of the House, Rep. John Boehner (R-OH 8th) announced his resignation. Boehner allegedly wanted to resign after the 112th Congress but his handpicked heir, seven term incumbent  former Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA 7th), but he was ignominously upset by Rep. Dave Brat (R-VA 7th) in the Republican Primary. So  Boehner blustered that he wanted to resign after the pinnacle of his career in hosting Pope Francis to speak before a joint session of Congress.  Of course, this “Zip-a-Dee Doo Dah” excuse conveniently ignores the looming Rep. Mark Meadows (R-NC 11th) Motion to Vacate the Chair, which the Speaker would either lose or have to win with Democrat votes. Boehner gave a month for his resignation to take effect in late October, 2015.

It is a good thing that Speaker Boehner gave a month to let things shake it.  Everything was arranged for Majority Leader Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-CA 23rd prior 22nd) to assume the big chair. But then McCarthy opened his big mouth during a friendly interview with Sean Hannity in which inartful articulation about Hillary Clinton blew two years of non-partisan investigation by House Select Benghazi Committee chairman Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-SC 4th).

McCarthy’s gaffe enlarged a gulf between the House Republican establishment and the Freedom Caucus, which was reluctant to back a Cocktail Party candidate.   The Freedom Caucus had been poised to support Rep. Daniel Webster (R-FL 8th), who is less conservative then the Freedom Caucus but open to rules reform.  However, before the Republican Caucus secretly voted on their choice, McCarthy suddenly resigned and the vote never took place.

In the aftermath of this announcement, there was pressure to draft House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI 1st) from divergent voices like Trey Gowdy and Mitt Romeny. But Ryan   was leery about leading what some might characterize as a den of vipers to spend lots of his time fundraising away from family.  Ryan took a week to decide his druthers.  Ryan announced that he would run if his candidacy would unite the party and under certain conditions (such as reducing his extra congressional travel).



Paul Ryan was hailed as a conservative when he was chosen to be former Governor Mitt Romney’s (R-MA) running mate in 2012, yet was run down by some radicalized conservatives for his stance reformist inclinations on immigration.  As Ryan readied himself to possibly assume the Speakership, he tapped  David Hoppe, a veteran conservative who now works at the Heritage Foundation to be his  chief of staff. Yet even this move was characterized by discontented populists as “picking a Washington lobbyist”.  Moreover, some said that the Freedom Caucus would be sell outs if they backed Paul Ryan for speaker. But a super majority (but not 80%) of the Freedom Caucus expressed willingness to support Ryan for Speaker so the Wisconsin Congressman put his name forward for consideration.

Keeping these recent events in mind, it would be wise to discern what makes for a good Speaker. Some would claim, res ipsa loquitur, that the person must be able to speak.  Thus, Kevin McCarthy’s disjointed utterances should have disqualified him. There is no doubt that the Hannity snafu killed McCarthy’s bid to be Speaker.  But it was not because he was not articulate in his utterances.  Former Democrat House Speaker and now Minority Leader Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA 12th prior 5th and 8th) was not a skilled speaker but was on message and ruled her caucus with an iron fist (and is aided by a sympathetic mainstream media).  Looking back into recent history, Rep. Denny Hastert was not chosen to be the chief spokesman for Republicans or the House.  Neither was Rep. Tom Foley (D-WA 5th).

On the other hand, Rep. Newt Gingrich (R-GA 6th), Rep. Jim Wright (D-TX 12th) and Rep. Tip O’Neil (D-MA 8th) were able media front men while being Speaker.  So being clean, well spoken and  articulate, to borrow a compliment from Vice President Joe Biden, can augment the Speaker’s role but is not quintessential.

A second trait often associated with the House Speakership is as a fundraiser.  This would have been a task that Rep. Kevin McCarthy would have excelled at, lest the Benghazi bungle.  Boehner seems to have done well at raising funds, particularly for those who would support establishment leadership.  But this party role is something which Rep. Paul Ryan did not relish.  Obviously, it is ancillary to the job of being Speaker of the House and constitutionally the second in the line of succession to the Presidency.

A third quality associated with being Speaker is setting priorities.  Newt Gingrich was legionary for nationalizing the 1994 cycle and voting on the Contract with America in the first 100 days of the 104th Congress. Nancy Pelosi rallied her caucus in supporting legislation which impeded the waning George W. Bush administration in the 110th Congress and facilitated President Barack Obama’s agenda in the 111th Congress.

While current Speaker John Boehner has done some things to quell conservatives in the GOP caucus, like eventually launching the Benghazi Select Committee, suing about Obamacare and recently establishing a select committee to study Planned Parenthood abuses, his style tended to be top down and accommodating the powers that be in the White House. For instance, the lawsuit on Obamacare is window dressing with little chance of success (as it is a political issue that courts will eschew).  Congress voted many times to repeal Obamacare, but it was not really attached to budgets or fought for doggedly in conference committees.

Boehner also reneged on understandings which irked the base and conservatives.  For instance, Boehner repeatedly broke the Hastert Rule (bills must receive a majority of the majority to be put on the floor).  This meant that legislation passed with Democrat votes. Boehner would also jam down bills, like a continuing resolution or other lengthy legislation without giving members (and the public) three days to read it before voting.  So, to echo Nancy Pelosi on Obamacare, “We have to vote on the bill before we know what is in it.”.  Not a wise way to run a railroad.

Many rank-and-file conservatives wanted one of their own to be Speaker.  So social media pushed Trey Gowdy or Freedom Caucus leader Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH 4th).  This is under the assumption that a true Conservative would dominate the GOP caucus and get things done.

[L] Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH 4th) [R] Rep. Raul Labrador (R-ID 1st) [photo: BD Matt]

Well, the popular press has branded the Freedom Caucus as being ultra-right wingers bent on their own way.  But at the October Conservation with Conservatives presser, Rep. Raul Labrador (R-ID 1st) struck a much more restrained set of expectations.  The Freedom Caucus realized that with unity of around 38 votes they had a certain amount of power, to deny a candidate the requisite 218 votes, but they could not successfully back one of their own as Speaker.

It may seem strange that a Republican member generally considered an up and coming Conservative like Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-UT 3rd) only got lukewarm support in his bid for Speaker, as the Freedom Caucus was initially poised to back Rep. Daniel Webster, who had a 57% Liberty rating.  Rather than have a conservative warrior in the big chair, they wanted someone who would hear their voice.

What really bothered members of the Freedom Caucus was process issues.  They were tired of being shut out in the Committee process, not being able to advance their own legislation or  offer amendments during mark-ups. Ironically, this was not always because their amendments might lose, but that they could carry the day and ruin the pre-baked cake that House leadership had concocted with their counterparts in the Senate or across Pennsylvania Avenue.

Webster promised to have a bottom up leadership process and that influenced the Freedom Caucus.  While Ryan issued some daring demands (like get rid of the Motion to Vacate the Chair), he seems to have mollified the Freedom Caucus.  Scuttlebutt is that Ryan promised to not raise immigration reform until there is a new President. Politico reported that the Freedom Caucus and Ryan agreed in principle on most items and the Freedom Caucus would have some “buy in” on legislation, but his candidacy was still “take it or leave it”.  That was still good enough for 70% of the House Freedom Caucus.

This meeting of the minds did not win over all anti-establishment Republicans.  Rush Limbaugh posulated that to donor class got what they wanted in Paul Ryan.  Glenn Beck accused the Freedom Caucus of being sell-outs. But Beck wanted the House to look outside of its chambers to find a leader, by endorsing Senator Ben Sasse's (R-NB) modest proposal to draft AEI President Arthur Brooks.  In addition, Mark Levin railed at Ryan for never meeting a bailout he did not like.

Ryan may not be the essential man for Speaker but one wonders what Conservative critics want. Who would they choose and why?  If no one is likely to win, would firebrands be OK with Speaker Boehner remaining in place?  This is why discerning what makes a good Speaker matters to understand what candidate to support and appreciating the consequences of the choice.

Representative Ryan tends to be a conservative but has some bagging regarding bailouts and lingering concerns about immigration.  If he becomes Speaker, he may not be out of the rubber chicken circuit as much fundraising. But Ryan will probably be more of a media friendly face of the House and can articulate the Republican message.  Ryan’s reluctance to leave the Ways and Means Committee is because he wanted to radically reform our tax code from the burdensome stack of bureaucratic regulations.  It remains to be seen if this reformist impetus can be instituted while in the Speaker’s chair.

The Republican House Caucus will vote in secret on October 28th. If Ryan is a clear winner, then a formal floor vote should follow on October 29th as Boehner steps down.  But if the votes are not they, all hell will break loose and the House will need to discern what makes for an acceptable choice for Speaker. When Gingrich resigned in 1998, Rep. Bob Livingston (R-LA 1st) was poised to be Head of the House, but some kinks came up in that ascension, which brought about Speaker Denny Hastert.

On The Cruz Effect and the Capitol Hill Cocktail Party

Former Senator Tom Coburn (R-OK) was recently interviewed on Sirius-XM radio by Pete Dominick in which he disparaged "The Cruz Effect".  Coburn chaffed at lawmakers being put in a position to make desperate stands about legislative items which he believes have no chance of overcoming a veto. This was not the first time in which Coburn raised this reluctance to futilely fight. Coburn said similar things to Joe Scarborough on MSNBC's Morning Joe in 2013.

Senator Coburn was a 20 year veteran of the Senate and had developed a reputation for being "Dr. No" for his conservative intransigence.  Yet before retiring to tend to his Colon Cancer after the 2014 election cycle, Senator Coburn exhibited an animus against Tea Party types, with Huffington Post headlines bragging of a Coburn Smack Down of the Tea Party. Coburn was quick to condem Senator Cruz's shut down tactic on Obamacare. Some Tea Party constituents wondered if he was a Charlatan, Traitor or Patriot for his go along to get along Senatorial approach  gun control.

Although he is no longer in the Senate, Senator Coburn is pushing a Cocktail Party approach to things. In Oklahoma, it is not hard to sound conservative and promise to repeal Obamacare, protect the second amendment or now even to defund Planned Parenthood.  But where the rubber meets the road in legislating in the District of Calamity, intentions and ardor matter.

When speaking to Scarborough about Obamacare in 2013, Senator Coburn rightly points out that Republicans did not have 67 votes to overcome an expected Presidential veto from Barack Obama. Right. So when has either party had vetoproof supermajorities in the Senate? Not in nearly half a century.  In the 89th Congress (1965-67), Democrats held 68 seats in the Senate and 295 House seats. During the New Deal, Democrats had veto proof majorities in the 74th and 75th Congresses (1935-39).  During Reconstruction after the Civil War, there were veto proof majorities for Republicans in the 39th, 40th, 41st and 43rd Congresses.

So having an assured veto proof majority is a rarity in American polity. Nowadays, the benchmark seems to be reaching Cloture (now set at 60 votes in the Senate).  After the election of Barack Obama and the eventual seating of Senator Al Franken (D-MN), Democrats had Cloture proof majority until Senator Scott Brown, the elected replacement for Senator Ted Kennedy (D-MA) was seated (replacing interim Senator Paul Kirk (D-MA)).

So it is fanciful for a Republican to think that their measures will have veto-proof (or Cloture proof) majorities by party votes alone through regular legislative procedures. But does that mean not doing anything because you are unsure if it will be enacted?

The reason why the comments of a former Republican Senator matter is that it epitomizes the conflict on Capitol Hill for the next Speaker and is a reason why outsider Republican Presidential candidates like Donald Trump, Ben Carson, Carly Fiorina and Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) are leading in the polls.

What has been called the Surrender Caucus is only happy to fight for bills which they are certain will be enacted.  Sure, you can campaign conservatively for the "rubes" back home, but politicians who are comfortably ensconced in the District of Calamity Cocktail Party won't spend any political capital for causes in which victory is uncertain.  Hence they surrender without a real fight.

For example, with the recent effort to defund Planned Parenthood, there were attempts to attach a rider onto a Continuing Resolution to divert funding for womens' health from the embattled abortionists to community health centers. The Byrd Rule for budget bills only required 51 votes for passage (avoiding a Cloture Vote). But President Obama promised to veto the CR and Republican Leadership feared that it might be blamed for a government shut down.  So they surrendered without a fight and Senate Majority "Leader" Mitch McConnell jammed down a clean CR through December 11th. This was not a one-off but was indicative of a pattern, which Tea Party renegades like Cruz have exposed for the shame that it is.

It might have been messy, but having must pass legislation like the Highway Bill, a Continuing Resolution or a real Congressional Budget with liberally unappealing riders might have forced the hand of President Obama to shut the government down.  If the Republicans had a better communication strategy, they might not automatically be blamed for shutting the government down when it was an Executive Branch veto which did the dirty deed.  As the branches sought to craft a resolution, concessions might be extracted.  So in the case of Obamacare (a.k.a. the Affordable Care Act), a nigglesome provision like the employer mandate could be up for grabs, which eventually would kill the clunky and unpopular system.  But that involves some guts to take a political risk and then be ready to fight hard in the media and on Capitol Hill.But it's so much easier to, echoing Mr. Coburn: "Dingity, we tried but we just didn't have the votes to do it. Too bad (but we'll still rail against it for the next election).

The House Republican Caucus is set to nominate another candidate for Speaker.  Despite the entreaties of Speaker John Boehner that he is retiring after the crowing achievement of his Congressional career of having Pope Francis speak before a Joint Session of Congress, the reality is that he was set to resign because he would lose a Vacate the Chair vote.  Boehner could not win the necessary votes in the GOP Caucus because the Freedom Caucus both wants a leader who will fight but will also vote on their legislation rather than dictate what will be voted on (and will will or will pointedly lose and be a campaign issue).

After the talking heads shows this weekend, there is speculation that House Ways and Means Chairman Representative Paul Ryan (R-WI 1st) is reconsidering running for Speaker but he does not want  any strings attached to achieve the big chair.  Ryan's record on immigration issues does not jibe with conservatives and not allowing stands for legislation not certain to pass goes against the grain of the Freedom Caucus.

In the larger Presidential Primary picture, many insiders wonder why political novices like Donald Trump, Ben Carson and Carly Fiorina lead in the polls.  Perhaps they are not seem corrupted by the system and are talking a good game about fighting the power.

Senator Coburn's cautionary comments about legislating are true enough, but they reveal that establishment Republicans don't really want to fight. Some Tea Party elected officials have not sold out to the Establishment. This explains why Leaders are anxious to primary rebellious Tea Party types and bad mouth others.  Since Republicans have not had a Veto Proof majority since 1875, is it their role to be Democrat lite, only proposing what can get passed and signed by a Democrat President?  What about the years when there were Republican Majorities in both Chambers of Congress and Republican President?  It does not seem like things were much different then.

Pundits have noted that Congress has a similar favorability rating to the Hermit Kingdom of North Korea with communist dictator Kim-Il-ung. This might explain why disaffected voters might welcome a congressional Cruz missile in the form of fighting for principles and causes.  This will be put to the test during the Republican primaries.  But political junkies might get early indications how this "fight to fight" will succeed  in the Speaker's Race.

Rep. Louie Gohmert on the Speaker's Race

Frank Luntz on House Speaker's Race

Rep. Blake Farenthold on the Speaker's Race

Senatorial Sasse-iness (sic) on Choice for Speaker

Freshman Senator Ben Sasse (R-NE) generated a social media storm as he chimed in on choices for the Speaker of House chair which will be open at the end of October.

It was unclear if Senator Sasse was tweeting tongue in cheek or it was serious Sasse-iness (sic) when he suggested electing American Enterprise Institute President Arthur Brooks for Speaker or if his choice epitomized the qualities of vision, hard work, resolve and wit which Sasse believes is key to be an effective Speaker.

Prior to his social media sharing, Sasse hoped that the Speaker's election would be a transformational debate on the direction of the country, as opposed a discussion as to whether conservatives could be placated.



Sasse did not express any favoritism towards the three announced Speaker candidates: Majority Leader Rep.  Kevin McCarthy (R-CA 23rd) who Speaker Boehner favors; Rep. Daniel Webster (R-FL 8th) who first defeated Rep. Alan Grayson (D-FL 8th now 9th and running for Senate) and House Government Reform Chair Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-UT 3rd).

[L] Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-CA 23) [C] Rep. Daniel Webster (R-FL 8th) [R] Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-UT 3rd)

When pressed about what Nebraskan voters thought about the Speaker's race, Sasse candidly quipped:  "You can't really go anywhere in Nebraska where anyone cases about that question. They don't care.  They think Congress sucks."

The House Republican caucus will meet on Thursday October 8th to vote for Speaker.  Rep. McCarthy insists that he has 200 votes for Speaker.  But the anonymity for votes in the Caucus might not yield as much support as the Majority Leader expects.

And if no candidate reaches 218 votes (or a majority if members vote "present" or miss the vote)  when the full House considers the measure, then an interim speaker takes over, which may be the Majority Leader. There is a concern that the two dozen Freedom Caucus members may vote in bloc and block McCarthy from winning.

It is interesting that the GOP Caucus has put off other votes on leadership, like a Majority Leader vote in case Mr. McCarthy is poised to ascend to the Speakership, until the day before current Speaker Boehner resigns. This might allow a candidate who has a plurality but not a majority time to garner more votes.  The timing also may put pressure on members not to invite chaos in the House.

Perhaps then Arthur Brooks in the big chair might not seem like such an outlandish idea.

h/t: Politico

Jeb Bush on John Boehner

On John Boehner Stepping Down as Speaker of the House

Speaker John Boehner's press conference announcing his now pending resignation as Speaker at the end of October was a surreal mixture of cheeriness, candor and subterfuge.  

It was odd to have a politician who is third in line to succeed the President sing "Zip-a-Dee-Do-Dah" from Disney's Song of the South (1946) at a somber moment as he contemplates his post-speakership future.  This may to be project a sunny confidence to himself and the public. Yet it is not the first time that Mr. Boehner has sung Zip-a-Dee-Do-Dah in the face of hard questions.  Perhaps he likes to see Mr. Bluebird on his shoulder. 

Speaker Boehner showed some candor when speaking about stepping down from the Speakership.  Mr. Boehner revealed that he intended to do so at the end of the 113th Congress, but events during the summer of 2014 changed plans.  What that meant was that Speaker Boehner's hand picked successor to the Speaker's gavel, then Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA 7th)  lost a primary challenge to a small college economist professor now Congressman David Brat (R-VA 7th).  Seeing the House in turmoil, Speaker Boehner decided to continue on in the big chair.

Yet it strains credulity that Mr. Boeher's decision was spur of the moment.  During the parade of cable coverage of Pope Francis' visit to Washington, a political commentator opined that the culmination Mr.  Boehner's  tenure as Speaker was to greet the Pope in the Capitol so why not just drop the mike afterwards and proclaim "I'm outta' here".  Was it prescience or planted pontification by the pundit?

How convenient that the day after the Pope's visit to DC on a dead news day in Washington that Mr. Boehner just decides "I'm gonna' do it."  Sure. 

Speaker Boehner's remarks on resigning glossed over the real reason why he was vacating his chair. Mainly because he no longer had the votes within the Republican Caucus to retain power if Representative Mark Meadows (R-NC 11th) actually filed the Motion to Vacate the Chair, which is a privileged motion for the full House to vote on leadership.  It became crystal clear to Mr. Boehner that he did not have the votes to win by a party line vote.

Republican Establishment politicians in the House loyal to Speaker Boehner, like Representative Devin Nunes (R-CA 22nd) began to attack  to the Freedom Caucus as "Pelosi Republicans", which was an odd turn of phrase, as Boehner would have needed to rely upon the graces of Democrat Minority Leader to engineer a victory for Speaker Boehner (by having some members vote for retaining Boehner as Speaker or merely vote present). 

One suspects that Mr. Boehner is being coy about his future plans.  Maybe he does not want to give out his forwarding address to K Street at the present time. By stepping down instead of being voted out, his name may have more Marquis cache after the one year  cooling off period to comply with the 2007 Lobbying Law ends.

Senator Marco Rubio at 2015 Value Voters Summit 

Whether or not Speaker Boehner's resignation was planned or was spontaneous, this is no argument how it was received by conservatives.  At the Value Voters Summit, which featured a cattle call of Republican Presidential aspirants, the one line which drew the loudest and most sustained applause was when Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL) announced from the dais the news that Speaker Boehner was leaving office.  The next scheduled speaker at the Values Voters Summit had to cancel, as Congressman Mark Meadows was a little busy after that news.

Devin Nunes on Vacating the Chair and Pelosi Republicans

As the Motion to Vacate the Chair stops being a theoretical idle threat and enters the realm of political possibility, some Speaker Boehner loyalists have begin to lash out.

Congressman Devin Nunes is the youngest Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee. He did not get this coveted position without the aid of leadership.  Thus, it explains his harsh words about the Freedom Caucus.

The trouble is that his explanation of the process is mistaken.  If Speaker Boehner has trouble securing enough votes to defeat the Motion to Vacate the Chair, Boehner and the Establishment Republicans either need to rely upon the graciousness of House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA 12th previously 8th) in getting some of her Democrat Caucus to support Boehner or vote Present, thus lowing the threshold for victory. 

There are indications that Pelosi might be willing to lend her support, but at what price?  Could the Republican Caucus countenance a Speaker who retains power only by relying upon support from the other aisle? If it is a down low deal, with some Democrats skipping the vote or voting Present, what concessions will have to be made.  Or is it just the pleasure of watching Boehner twist in the wind thus allowing more progressive power during the 114th Congress and beyond?

If Boehner loses re-election, there is no way that Nancy Pelosi or another Democrat garners the 218 votes necessary for ascending to the Speaker's seat.  So it is a misnomer to call the Freedom Caucus "Pelosi Republicans".

Vacant Musings About Capitol Hill

Second term Congressman Mark Meadows (R-NC 11th) submitted a Motion to Declare the Speaker’s Chair vacant in July. This is not something which has been used in Congress in the last century. So initially, this seemed like a futile gesture of frustration filed by a disgruntled back bencher just before the Summer Break.  The Republican establishment thought that the motion would lose momentum by going through the standard committee process. But there are now reports that Speaker Boehner is worried that he is short of votes in the Republican caucus to be re-elected as Speaker.

At the start of the 114th Congress, Speaker Boehner faced a revolt from two dozen Tea Party types who voted for other GOP candidates.  Boehner barely won by two votes and was aided by the fact that many New York Democrats were absent for the vote to attend the funeral for Governor Mario Cuomo (D-NY).  This exigency lowered the threshold for achieving a majority.

Some have speculated that insurgent Republican Congressmen could put up a liberal Republican candidate, like Rep. Peter King (R-NY 2nd), to win enough Democrat votes to take down the current king of the Hill.  This notion is mistaken because it presumes that Democrats would want to replace Speaker Boehner and does not fully understand the process.

In fact, there is some speculation that John Boehner might have to rely upon Democrat votes to retain the Speaker’s chair. Arguably, House Democrats may prefer to have  Boehner as Speaker if they are not going to be in the majority.  However, having Democrats prop up a wounded Republican Speaker would reflect poorly upon the cosiness of the Washington political establishment and the effectiveness of the leadership.

But there might be a passive way which the Democrat caucus could prop up their favored establishment opposition.  In the event that the Motion to Declare the Chair Vacant succeeds, Democrats could conveniently have a few dozen Democrats miss the vote, thereby lowering the total vote count, thereby countering the thirty GOP insurgents and re-electing Speaker Boehner.
 The trick would be to accurately estimate the number of dissenting GOP votes.  A similar outcome could also be achieved the helpful opposition voted “Present”, however, that would leave Democrat fingerprints on the vote.

If no candidate garners the necessary 218 votes (or a majority of those voting), then there would be subsequent votes.  But like the scenario of a brokered political convention, all bets are off after the initial round. If Mr. Boehner could not achieve a majority in the first vote, power would ebb away.  Without having the power of the Speaker’s chair and the ability to appoint chairmen and exile dissenters from committees, he would lose the fealty of the current leadership.  In fact, current Majority Leader Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-CA 23rd) and current House Majority Whip Steve Scalise (R-LA 1st) might not be in contention for not mooting the revolt beforehand.

With the Iran Deal, legislation to defund Planned Parenthood and passing the Budget on the docket this fall, a leadership battle could make this a very interesting time on Capitol Hill.  But observing the machinations of the Senate's Corker/Cardin Iran Deal vote, don't discount the establishment's ability to choreograph "victories which seem inimical to the vox populi but keeps their Cocktail Party plans. 

Latest Hillary E-Mail Dump Offers Incisive Oppo Analysis

The latest batch of Hillary Clinton's sanitized State Department e-mails offered some incisive analysis of the opposition by Clinton's "unofficial" advisor Sidney Blumenthal.   

Blumenthal's sharp criticisms from 2011 of the newly elected Speaker of the House John Boehner seem to reflect the initial animus against elites which the wave of Tea Party candidates harbored for a do nothing Congress.

However, the Clinton confidant goes much further than the public grousing against the putative head of the GOP-e Cocktail Party. The ad hominem attacks gut Speaker Boehner's leadership and loyalty.

Where "Sid Vicious"'s assessment seems awry is being "Delay without the whip".  Despite misgivings by many in the Republican Caucus, Boehner and the current leadership team have managed to retain their positions.

 John Boehner was be re-elected for another term as House Speaker in January 2015, despite a couple of last minute challenges by Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-TX 1st), Rep. Daniel Webster (R-FL 10th) et ali.  Boehner won re-election by two votes. This coup within the GOP caucus may have been thwarted because there were a number of missing New York Democrats who were attending former Governor Mario Cuomo's (D-NY) funeral the day of the vote, which lowered the threshold for  having a majority.

Dissatisfaction has not been abated from Tea Party types in the House Republican caucus. In July 2015, Representative Mark Meadows (R-NC 11th) introduced a Resolution to Declare the Office of Speaker of the House vacant.  Since this was not a privileged motion, the resolution needs to go through the regular committee process, in which it will likely be quashed by Republican Boehner supporters.

For his part, Speaker Boehner does not quietly suffer indignation from insurgents.  Recently, during a political fundraiser in Colorado, John Boehner noted that a leading Tea Party figure, Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) has been on the Presidential primary hustings which he said keeps that "jackass" out of Washington. So much for Reagan's 11th commandment.

The hallmark of the 2016 Republican Presidential primary campaign has been outsiders who are rally around the perception that Washington doesn't work with the current ineffectual leadership.  One wonders how an anti-establishment wave would work with the accomodationist leadership of Speaker John Boehner and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY).  Could Boehner co-opt incoming Freshmen again or would their anger at the system and earnestness effectuate real change in the District of Calamity (sic)?

Trey Gowdy on Hillary Clinton's E-Mails

    Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-SC 4th), the Chairman of the House Select Committee on Benghazi, responded to the Hillary E-Mail controversy on CBS's Face The Nation.



 Some cynics wonder why Chairman Gowdy is now in the forefront about Hillary's sui generis e-mails while heading the State Department, as the Select Committee had knowledge of this practice going back to last summer.  Gowdy is a former federal prosecutor so he is patiently building a case and did not want Ms. Clinton to testify before he had all of the information vetted.

While a litigator in an Article III court wants all relevant information, such a broad request could be framed as a witch hunt or a fishing expedition in the political realm.  So now that there is sufficient public pressure, the former Secretary of State may feel compelled (for continued electoral viability) to "step up" and completely surrender the cyber records and not just feign compliance.

 Chairman Gowdy, who first came to office as part of the 2010 Tea Party wave elections, may distinguish himself between the bluster and the brashness of the District of Calamity by building a compelling case to discern what happened in the Benghazi bungle of September 11, 2012.

But if Gowdy fails to impressively interrogate the former chief of Foggy Bottom, conservative cynics may echo Hillary's last Congressional testimony--"What difference, at this point, does it make?"  Combined with Speaker Boehner's capitulation on DHS funding with a rider excluding Executive Amnesty (which lost 167 Republican votes on final passage), conservatives might wonder if having friends like that in high office whether they need enemies.

Former Secretary of State Clinton claimed that we should strive to figure out why the Benghazi bungle happened.  Could it be due to insecure communications from hdr22@clintonemail.com (or mau-suit@clintonemail.com)?  Or a pattern in the Obama Administration to use backdoor, off official communications, to convey inconvenient truths? It does not seem that it was just Hillary Clinton and Eric Holder, as we should not forget the pseudonym Richard Windsor (a.k.a. EPA chief Lisa Jackson ).  So much for the Obama Administration being the most transparent regime ever, as they took their anti-secrecy award in 2011 in a closed door presentation. 

Netanyahu: “The greatest danger facing our world is the marriage of militant Islam with nuclear weapons.”

Israeli Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu made his third address before a Joint Session of Congress to in order speak about existential threats against his nation which stem from the prospective Iran Nuclear Deal. 

The Obama Administration expressed offense at the Netanyahu speech because House Speaker John Boehner broke protocol by not having not cleared the invitation with the Obama White House (never mind the constitution). The ire against the Israeli P.M.'s remarks then shifted that it was too close to the Israeli elections, even though National Security Adviser Susan Rice recently railed against Netanyahu for undermining US/Israel relations.   Some 56 Congressional Democrats boycotted Netanyahu's speech. Valerie Jarrett insisted that President Obama was too busy to watch our only Democratic ally in the Middle East's speech. 

These petulant politicos missed a 40 minute speech which had the feel of a State of the Union address, but with substance arguing against making a bad deal with a revolutionary, expansionistic, jihadic regime with an earned bad reputation.  

While Prime Minister Netanyahu displayed extraordinary graciousness to Democrats (and had a shout out to Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) and Bibi underlined underpublicized kindnesses which President Obama has shown towards Israel, the speech was a methodical public policy schooling of the perils of bad deals with Persians.  Shortly before he delivered his remarks, the White House warned Netanyahu not to reveal state secrets about the Iran talks. Hence, Mr. Netanyahu noted that he was using public sources for his citations so people could Google it.

Mr. Netanyahu also thanked Congress for its robust support for their alliance in a rough neighborhood over the years.  To illustrate how instrumental the American-Israeli relationship has been, Netanyahu noted: "This Capitol Dome helped build our Iron Dome" (the missile system which protected Israeli civilians from random rocket terror during the latest military campaign by Palestinian militant terrorism from HAMAS. 

Netanyahu substantiated the ignomy of the revolutionary Islamic Republic of Iran and reminded people that spreading jihad is part of the current Iranian constitution. While Washington seems to have been concerned about ISIS's atrocious antics, Mr. Netanyahu opined that Iranian intentions toward crafting it's own caliphate is no better as the are both competing for the crown of militant Islam.  Thus: "The enemy of  your enemy is your enemy."  

Prime Minister Netanyahu argued against making a bad deal with Tehran rather than no deal at all.  Netanyahu detailed how a deal on the Iran Nukes would not be a farewell to arms but a farewell to arms control in the Middle East.  The Prime Minister invoked U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry's analysis that Iran could eventually gain nuclear weapons because the prospective agreement does not require destruction of centrofuses and could quickly be ramped up after an agreement.  Bibi quipped that Tehran is adroit at playing "hide and cheat" with weapons inspectors.  Besides, inspectors just document but do not stop cheating. Furthermore, the Iranian missile program is not covered in the nuclear deal, so the Islamic Republic could quickly propel their inchoate arms to Europe or even America. 

Netanyahu rallied the Congressional crowd by exhorting: "We must all stand together to stop Iran's march of conquest, subjugation and terror."  This was coupled with the wisdom "The greatest danger facing our world is the marriage of militant Islam with nuclear weapons."

The Lamestream Media has been lax at explaining the nuances and prospective pitfalls of the Iranian Nuclear Talks.  Netanyahu's speech brought these issues to the forefront of public consideration.  Moreover, the warm reception which the Israeli Prime Minister was received by Congress highlights the strength of US-Israeli relations, in the face of an Obama Administration which seems intent to punish its friends and rewarding its enemies in a tough neighborhood of the world. In arguing against the existential threat against Israel, the Prime Minister underlined that it will act alone in necessary but that "I know that Israel does not stand alone-- America stands with Israel."

Barack Obama on DHS Funding

  

 During the lame duck session of the 112th Congress, House Republicans fully funded FY 2015 budget, with the exception of Department of Homeland Security, in which a short term continuing resolution was applied to allow for a rider which would not Congressionally fund President Obama's Executive Action on illegal immigration.

 In the new 113th Congress, Senate Democrats refused to allow cloture to debate the DHS bill, lest the funding bill pass on majority terms.  The Obama White House and lackeys in the Lamestream Media and Senate Democrats are striving to frame Republicans for being obstructionists for not rubber stamping Mr. Obama's extra-constitutional effective amnesty. 

 Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) has suggested bifurcating the Executive Amnesty issue from DHS funding.  But this legislative legerdemain was acceptable to Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) only if House Speaker John Boehner acceded to Obama's will.  So far, Speaker Boehner holds the attitude that Senate Democrats ought to "get off their asses" and vote on the House bill. 

The GOP opponents seek to claim that Republicans will endanger the nation due to not funding DHS's $38 Billion budget. Alas, 80% of DHS's 240,000 employees are essential workers, who are required to report to work without a guaranteed pay check (even though all workers have routinely been paid after a budget standoff).  So security should not be an issue, even though the Obama Administration has been hyping the Boko Haram and al Shabob threat on the Mall of America and other Jewish owned shopping centers (but this has nothing to do with certain religions). 

So now the Obama Administration's tact has shifted to hardball politics.  During a townhall meeting telecast on MSNBC and Telemundo, President Obama dared the Republicans to pass the House bill, which would merit another Obama veto.   

  

 May the majorities in Congress stick to their principles and not quickly fold to a passive aggressive bully chief executive.  No matter what, the Lamestream Media is ready to repudiate Republicans. But the shutdown is so targeted that the public won't shed tears over the World War II monument being shut down as during the Flying Flip shutdown of October 2013.

h/t: Bruce Plante

Boehner: Senate Democrats Must "Get off Their Asses"

Over the last four years, Republicans have been painted as obstructionists as House bills have been passed and died in the Democrat controlled Senate because Senator Harry Reid (D-NV) as Senate Majority Leader did not want votes which would embarrass the President and force a veto.  In the six years of the Obama Administration, the Senate only passed a budget from regular orders once, the rest being Continuing Resolutions.

 In the 113th Congress, the House passed a budget early in the cycle, but which contained a rider which prohibits the Department of Homeland Security from expending funds from the Obama Administration's extra legal Executive Amnesty program.  Senate Democrats refuse to allow debate on the budget, much less block a final vote, as they hope to pressure the Republican Majority to cave in order to avoid an entire shutdown of DHS at the end of February .  Of course, most of DHS are essential workers so a hypothetical shutdown would just involve 33,000 administrative workers.

 Judging from the tough talk from Speaker Boehner, the House majority won't back down. But the Lamestream Media will still find a way to frame Republicans as being dangerous obstructionists.