Congressman Immolates Himself and Colleagues in Funding Fight
Congressman Immolates Himself and Colleagues in Funding Fight
Gaetz’s ouster of McCarthy paralyzed the one institution of government under GOP control
By an anonymous W&L graduate working in the U.S. House of Representatives
[Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-FL) (left) and Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) (right) confront each other on the House floor during McCarthy’s challenging bid for Speaker in January 2023. Source- CNN]
The recent ouster of Speaker Kevin McCarthy was a solution in search of a problem. The irony in Congressman Matt Gaetz’s (R-FL) move was that the arguments he lobbed against Speaker McCarthy applied just as much to his own actions as they did to McCarthy’s. Arguably, Gaetz’s actions put his stated goals more into jeopardy than McCarthy did at any point during his speakership.
Gaetz portrays himself as the embodiment of the conservative movement, but his motion to vacate the Speaker reeks of shortcomings that plague leftist arguments.
The famous economist Thomas Sowell posed three questions that can undermine any leftist argument: Compared to what? At what cost? What hard evidence do you have? Sowell’s questions reveal that leftist arguments are more commonly based on emotion than logic, and they fail to consider unintended consequences and even whether stated goals are furthered. Ironically, Gaetz’s argument against McCarthy also disintegrates when examined under Sowell’s lens.
Compared to what?
Gaetz and McCarthy didn’t always see eye to eye. In a Congress with hundreds of different perspectives and viewpoints, this was only to be expected.
However, disagreements with the Speaker do not themselves merit a drastic motion to vacate the chair. In Gaetz’s view, a different Speaker would better advance the goals of the conservative movement.
Of course, this may be true. Gaetz, however, failed to articulate a plan to follow the ouster of McCarthy. He did not suggest any viable alternatives to McCarthy nor explain how they would be more effective than the former Speaker.
It seems that Gaetz’s primary grievance was that McCarthy relied on Democratic support to pass two much needed bills to avert a debt crisis and a government shutdown, respectively. A sober examination would conclude that Democratic support is necessary for bills to be signed into law. After all, the Senate and White House are held by Democrats, and Republicans hold the House by only a small margin.
Gaetz and like-minded Republicans seem to think that a strong Republican stance can force Democrats to pass policies considered anathema to their base. They often fail to recognize that Democrats can make a similar stand, refusing to pass GOP policies and therefore creating gridlock.
However, when the country faces an imminent default on its debt or a government shutdown, legislation must be passed in a bipartisan manner. It is doubtful that any other Speaker could accomplish substantively better results than McCarthy, recognizing that a default or a government shutdown are both undesirable outcomes.
At what cost?
Suppose McCarthy truly was an ineffective Speaker, and a more conservative, effective Speaker could take the gavel. What harm could a motion to vacate do?
For starters, the motion paralyzed the House and showed the American people that Republicans cannot govern themselves, let alone mitigate the Biden administration’s policy failures.
Many Republicans cheer McCarthy’s ouster as a historic move against the “Swamp,” a long-awaited victory for true Americans over false Republicans and the corrupt establishment. Others, however, rightly see it as just another way Republicans have snatched defeat from the jaws of victory.
Worst of all, the motion severely damages the GOP’s image. Gaetz’s actions suggest the following to the American people: that House Republicans care more about the spotlight than governing in the country’s best interests; that they are more worried about intra-party drama than opposing Democrat policies; and that Republicans cannot govern.
The outster also makes accomplishing Gaetz’s stated objectives more difficult. Many House Republicans opposed any continuing resolution in favor of passing 12 individual appropriations bills, yet the new Speaker fight only dissolves the valuable time that could otherwise have been spent passing said appropriations bills and properly funding the federal government.
McCarthy’s ouster will instead guarantee either another continuing resolution or a government shutdown — precisely the situation that led to the ouster in the first place.
What hard evidence do you have?
Like any political figure, Speaker McCarthy wasn’t perfect. But we must be honest and sober in considering his failures, whether he was at fault, and how his errors could be remedied.
Who was at fault in the debt ceiling deal?
In May, McCarthy pushed the Limit, Save, Grow Act through the House as leverage against Senate Democrats and President Biden. However, Democrats refused to negotiate until default was imminent, forcing McCarthy to work with President Biden in devising the Fiscal Responsibility Act.
Many conservative Republicans had reasonable disagreements with the bill and ultimately opposed it. The Fiscal Responsibility Act passed with the support of moderate Democrats and Republicans. It is doubtful that another Speaker could have negotiated a materially more conservative bill, and the outcome can partly be blamed on Democrats’ refusal to negotiate earlier on.
Simply put, no Republican Speaker can control what the Democrats choose to do.
Who was at fault in the failure to pass 12 appropriations bills?
McCarthy promised in January to pass 12 separate appropriations bills as opposed to an omnibus spending bill. Doing so allows members of Congress to air grievances and more fully participate in the appropriations process.
Voting for an omnibus bill leaves little opportunity to analyze spending priorities, find possible cuts, or amend the bill. Separate bills thus give Republicans a better opportunity to address the national debt crisis and cut wasteful spending.
However, the twelve appropriations bills were delayed for reasons outside McCarthy’s control. Due to pressure from conservative Republicans, McCarthy tried to cut spending past his initial agreement with President Biden. Doing so delayed the bills’ passage out of committee.
In the days before the potential shutdown, some Republicans even tanked attempts to bring appropriations bills to a vote. As Speaker, McCarthy tried to fund the government as promised. The continued delays, which made a government shutdown increasingly likely, cannot solely be blamed on his leadership.
Gaetz made his position clear: he would never vote for a continuing resolution. A continuing resolution (CR) funds the government for a set period of time as Congress works to pass longer-term appropriations bills.
Gaetz and many conservative Republicans equate such legislation to giving up on their promise to cut spending for the American people. But Gaetz also claimed that he intended to keep the government open, a position increasingly at odds with his staunch opposition to any CR.
On the final day of Fiscal Year 2023, McCarthy ultimately put a “clean” CR to a vote. The day prior, McCarthy’s attempt to pass a more conservative CR was killed by conservative Republicans. Without a more conservative bill to wield as leverage, McCarthy acted to pass a clean CR with votes from Democrats to avert a government shutdown.
Unlike the bipartisan CR that had passed the Senate, McCarthy’s bill avoided continued funding for Ukraine — a major victory for conservative Republicans. McCarthy both refused the Senate CR and passed a more conservative bill through the House and Senate even after certain Republicans killed his leverage. He averted a government shutdown against all odds and secured an unexpected win for conservatives.
But as Gaetz had promised earlier: “If Kevin McCarthy puts a continuing resolution on the floor, it’s going to shot-chaser [sic]. Continuing resolution — motion to vacate.”
Ultimately, who is responsible for Republicans’ failure to pass meaningful policy?
We can start with Democrats. Democrats control the Senate. Democrats control the White House. Democrats control close to half of the House itself. The reality is, Democrats control most of the federal government, not Speaker McCarthy.
But Democrats are not all to blame. Gaetz laments that Republicans have failed to secure the border — but Gaetz tanked the bill that would have secured the border.
Instead of working to pass the 12 appropriations bills as promised, which would include funding for the border, the congressman preferred to initiate a Speaker succession fight. Gaetz laments that McCarthy passed a CR, while his own actions make another CR — or a prolonged shutdown — all the more inevitable.
To Gaetz, a RINO (Republican In Name Only) is one who compromises with Democrats to ignore conservative priorities and advance the liberal regime. Speaker McCarthy wasn’t perfect, but McCarthy also didn’t vote with every Democrat to paralyze the one lever of federal power that Republicans control. Gaetz effectively collaborated with Democrats to backstab his own party.
I would be pleased to see Congressman Jim Jordan (R-OH) take the gavel. But no one should be surprised if McCarthy’s ouster ultimately leads to a Speaker Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) — in this Congress, or the next.
The opinions expressed in this magazine are the author's own and do not reflect the official policy or position of The Spectator, or any students or other contributors associated with the magazine. It is the intention of The Spectator to promote student thought and civil discourse, and it is our hope to maintain that civility in all discussions