The Path Ahead

A number of our neighbors have been asking me about what happens when the new Congress convenes on January 3—and, particularly, whether the narrow Republican House majority (222 Republicans to 212 Democrats, with one vacancy) offers any hope for more bipartisan cooperation, and whether Kevin McCarthy will be elected as the next Speaker. I offer this update on what we know so far and what we can expect.

Clearly, there is a broad desire across the country to find bipartisan solutions to some of the major ongoing challenges that our country faces. Unfortunately, from my experience here, narrow control has paradoxically tended to increase, rather than decrease, partisan conflict. Both sides urge complete party unity either to maintain control or to secure the very few votes needed to eventually take control. Both sides look for “wedge” issues to divide the other. Usually, the only major bipartisan bills are those with tremendous lobby support and/or where the President reaches agreement directly with Republicans. And “bipartisan” does not always mean “good.”

Last year’s “bipartisan” infrastructure bill offers an example. While we very much needed the funding, President Biden junked the important policy changes approved in House-approved legislation, including provisions which I secured to consider climate impacts and expand local control over transportation funding. To demonstrate his “bipartisan” leadership by getting the votes of at least 10 Senate Republicans, he agreed to almost unlimited control of immense federal funding increases to TxDOT and its counterparts in other states, omitting our important reforms. And, of course, not even giving Greg Abbott’s TxDOT control over almost $30 billion in new federal funding was sufficient to make this bill actually “bipartisan” for Texas Republicans. Every one of them voted against this investment in our infrastructure, which ultimately became law.

Now, added to the mix is Kevin McCarthy’s willingness to do anything necessary to become Speaker. The Republican Party has long been divided between the extreme Right and a much smaller not-so-Right group. The number of House Republicans, who will cosponsor major Democratic-authored legislation, is in the single digits. The very few, who might show much bipartisan spirit are branded as RINO’s—Republicans in Name Only—and subject to primary challenges in heavily gerrymandered districts.

Even though he has been an outspoken leader in the Trump cult attacking our democracy, McCarthy has not been quite extreme enough to satisfy some of his colleagues. While he has been endorsed by a majority of the Republican Caucus, he does not yet have commitments from the 218 Republicans required to become Speaker. His opponents include Reps. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.), Bob Good (R-Va.), Ralph Norman (R-SC), Andy Biggs (R-Ariz.), Matt Rosendale (R-Mont.) and Chip Roy (R-Texas). Though strongly disputed by McCarthy, Rep. Biggs claims to have 20 Republicans ready to vote against his becoming Speaker.

If he loses 5 or more votes, McCarthy cannot become Speaker. So he is doing all he can between now and January 3 to make enough concessions to the far, far right to get elected. Those are the kind of concessions that will make it very difficult for him to cooperate with Democrats on any major issue, even in those few, unlikely situations where he might want to do so.

If, on the first ballot on January 3 McCarthy fails to get 218, we continue further rounds of balloting until someone does. That has not happened since 1923, when an earlier Republican split prevented re-election of a speaker, until the ninth round of voting.  There is a possibility, then, that McCarthy may not prevail, but this does not mean that a Democrat will be elected.

Whatever the outcome, I will continue seeking progress where we can make it, and remain dogged in pursuing our work to secure a healthier climate, a healthier democracy, and health care for far more Americans.

Despite recent setbacks in Texas, we must continue to cut through the noise in the news and remain civically engaged in this critical time for our country. As always, I welcome your good counsel.

Sincerely,

Lloyd