Before asking whether new US House of Representatives speaker Mike Johnson is up to the task ahead of him, it is worth detailing just how challenging that task is.
Congress must pass spending bills for the remainder of this fiscal year — beginning with another temporary extension needed in just three weeks. It must approve the annual military authorization bill and the farm bill, which covers food assistance programs. It must debate extra spending for Israel and other global crises. And this is all happening in a House that was already behind schedule even before Republicans threw away three weeks arguing over the speakership, and whose Republican Party majority opposes the positions that the majority of the Senate supports.
A lot of the early reporting has stressed Johnson’s extremely conservative policy preferences, as well as his role in supporting former US president Donald Trump’s effort to overturn the 2020 US presidential election. What matters much more, however, is whether he has the skillset needed for the job he just won. Scratch that: It is pretty clear, as a former adviser to former Republican Party speakers John Boehner and Paul Ryan points out, Johnson does not have the skills yet. So the question is whether he can develop them in what is likely to be a challenging, if not hostile environment.
Johnson needs to keep 221 Republicans, each with individual demands, happy. He needs to convince them to work together as a unified party even when they disagree. He needs to steer bills through the House floor, and then he would need to cut deals with the Senate and the White House. Then, when those deals are finalized, he would need scores of House Republicans to vote for bills many of them would rather oppose — and he would need those who are going to oppose them to limit themselves to complaining (however loudly) about it rather than attempting to take down the party in revenge. Or take down the speaker in revenge. Or, as has happened over the last two months, both.
It is possible that Majority Leader Steve Scalise can be of help to Johnson and the Republican Party as the new speaker learns how to do the job. However, Scalise and Majority Whip Tom Emmer were both humiliated as speaker nominees, not even getting a floor vote. It is unclear that they will be able to wield much influence going forward. Are they — as well as former speaker Kevin McCarthy and the other almost-speaker, Jim Jordan — going to be looking to avenge their humiliations? Do they each think he will be the true power behind the gavel? It is rare for even one rejected party leader to remain in Congress. Now there are four.
As a third-term member who has been on the fringe of leadership and whose pre-congressional career was in advocacy, Johnson has practically no experience in this sort of thing. His resume suggests he is more of an ideologue than a pragmatist, but his ability to win broad support in his party suggests that he must be able to portray himself as more than purely an advocate for a set of ideas.
If he is lucky, Johnson will get a bit of a honeymoon period from a Republican Party conference that is probably a little shell-shocked. However, if the radicals who helped bring down McCarthy are perceived as having won this round and act triumphant rather than conciliatory, things could quickly spiral out of control.
For an example of how things could go wrong, consider that Johnson has said that he would support another short-term extension of lapsed spending bills while House Republicans (finally) pass their own versions of full-year bills. Several radicals have argued that any such bills are a violation of conservative principles. Will they make an exception in this case? Or will they claim that Johnson is selling them out, just as McCarthy did? Then, when full-year bills are ready, will the party unite and vote for the rules that govern consideration of each bill — even if individual members are not happy with the bill as a whole? If not, there is essentially no working majority, and Republicans are back to where they were in September.
McCarthy, it must be said, was not very good at the job. At the same time, dysfunction within the Republican Party goes back decades, and confounded even skilled party leaders. Nor does it help that Trump is likely to continue to toss grenades that would disrupt even a healthy party. Realistically, muddling through is probably the best Johnson can hope for, even if he proves to be unusually good at the job. If not, House Republicans have already challenged experts’ imaginations about how bad things can get. So I will not even try to imagine it.
Jonathan Bernstein is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist covering politics. A former professor of political science at the University of Texas at San Antonio, he wrote A Plain Blog About Politics. This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial board or Bloomberg LP and its owners.
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS