Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) has exceeded my expectations – kudos! – when, with Ukraine teetering on the edge of collapse, he finally passed foreign aid packages for Ukraine, as well as Israel and Taiwan, over and through the objections of the anti-Ukraine brigade of the GOP House caucus – a group that some call the Putin Wing. This is all at the risk of his position as Speaker of the House, as it’s commonly said his advantage in the House is one seat, so if more than one Republican files a motion to vacate the seat, as Rep Greene (R-GA) and a couple of others have done so, and the motion is activated (not the proper terminology, I’m sure – apologies), then he’s subject to a vote. The implicit expectation is that the expected assent of all of the Democrats, currently in the minority, plus a few of the Republicans, would result in Johnson’s losing the position.
However, the Democrats are not an inflexible group. They’ve backed Johnson, in very limited circumstances, in other areas, and certainly aid to Ukraine is a top, top priority of the Democrats. I expect a horse trade of voting for Johnson as Speaker in exchange for getting the desired foreign aid packages to the floor for a vote – which then passed – did occur, even if such is denied by the principals. If the Putin Wing follows through on the motion to vacate, we’ll find out if that horse trade did occur. I think there’s little doubt that Rep and Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) can deliver the necessary votes to save Johnson.
But, beyond this apparent snub of the concerns of the execrable Putin Wing, there are other concerns for the masters of the Republican Party.
First, Speaker Johnson has defied the wishes of well-known anti-Ukraine partisan and Putin admirer Mr. Trump. Mr Trump, presumptive but not guaranteed Republican nominee for President in the 2024 national elections, has a host of troubles, consisting not only his current New York state criminal trial, but his health (age 77, with known heart disease) and even his reputation. To the latter most point, Mr Trump depends, to a very large degree, on his purported accomplishments as a businessman, lover, actor, and even as an avatar of the Biblical character of Cyrus. If he’s convicted in his current criminal trial, more voters will begin to disregard him as worthy of their vote; revelations in this trial, which is a collection of accusations that he falsified business records, could do more damage to him. Even his inclination to fall asleep while at the defendant’s table may damage him further.
In essence, this is another rip in the tattered fabric of the Republican Party. Many of the fourth-rate party officials, owing to Trump their newfound positions and prestige, will stick with him; but Johnson has shown that ignoring Trump’s wishes is possible, even when Vladimir Putin, President of Russia and invader of Ukraine, is involved. This, in turn, damages the mystique, unearned as it was and is, of Mr. Trump. Naturally, this is a complex relationship between Mr Trump and his base, and many will remain loyal even in the face of the most dire revelations in court. But many others will have reached their limit in the number of major indiscretions and doubts, and not vote for Mr. Trump. His performance in the primaries, while victories in all but Vermont, have not been as convincing as President Biden’s, or of the sort of a truly dominating politician. They reflect the results of a Party suffering internal conflict. And that’s fine, out of context. American politics is about debate, because debate and doubt result in positive progress. But in a Republican Party where uniform voting in general elections – Democrats fall in love, Republicans fall in line – is a virtual law, the untold strain on the voter is worse. One might think, reasonably, that the primaries are a release valve, but if one’s preferred candidate loses, how easy is it, intellectually and emotionally, to transfer their vote to the winning candidate, who the voter detests?
At some point, the Republican Party member blows a gasket and refuses to vote, to participate, to even be a member. This Gingrichian dictate is, like so many such dictates, like borrowing money to pay dividends in the corporate world: madness.
Second, the purported power of the Freedom Caucus, the primary troublemakers in the House, to decide issues and control the House, is now on the line. If the Democrats choose to vote to support Johnson for Speaker, the power of the Freedom Caucus is shown to be blunted. It’s another step to understanding the true image of such Representatives as Gaetz, Gosar, former Freedom Caucus member Greene, and a number of others, as simply a pack of power-hungry and immature clowns, with little idea of how to govern.
Third, this violates another Gingrichian dictate: never give the Democrats a substantial victory. This is about as big as they come, and, much to the blindly loyal Republicans’ dismay, they’ll discover the world doesn’t catch fire and burn. Thus are the Republican Party’s tenets slowly and painfully destroyed. Again, the Party will suffer damage as some members walk away.
So there are many consequences to Johnson’s decision to bring desperately needed foreign aid to the House floor, and for doctrinaire Republicans, clinging to Mr Trump’s pants legs, none of them are good.
