Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Why McCarthy is having trouble getting the votes to be speaker

Why McCarthy is having trouble getting the votes to be speaker

House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) (C), speaks during a news conference after the close of a vote by the U.S. House of Representatives on a resolution formalizing the impeachment inquiry centered on U.S. President Donald Trump October 31, 2019 in Washington, DC.

Mark Wilson/Getty Images

Frost served 26 years as a Congressman from the 24 th District of Texas (Dallas-Ft. Worth) from 1979 to 2005. During that time he served eight years in the House Democratic Leadership, four years as Chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee and four years as chair of the House Democratic Caucus. He was a member of the House Rules Committee and the House Budget Committee. Since leaving Congress he served four years as chair of the National Endowment for Democracy and is the immediate past president of the Former Members of Congress Association.

As a former 26-year Congressman from Texas (1979-2005), I have observed and been personally involved in many House leadership races. Knowing that the race may have been concluded before you read this, I none-the-less believe that the following comments are important to shed some light on the current spectacle the American people have been subjected to and the inevitable chaos that will follow no matter who eventually wins the Speakership.


Leadership races are often already over before the first vote is cast. The most recent example was Nancy Pelosi’s race for speaker four years ago. The House was closely divided and there was a group of dissident Democrats who wanted her replaced with someone younger. To her credit, Nancy made a deal with the dissidents before the voting started. She agreed to limit her tenure to that term and one more. The opposition disappeared.

Kevin McCarthy has known for several months that there is a rump group in his own conference that would vote against him on the floor, thus denying him the 218 votes necessary to win. And yet, even with eight weeks’ worth of negotiating time, he was not capable of making a deal the way Pelosi did and thus has subjected him and his party to massive embarrassment on live television.

If McCarthy ultimately is successful in making a last-minute deal and winning the Speakership, he will have given away the store and be Speaker in name only. As we say in the South, he will be a “capon.” For those of you not familiar with the term, a capon is a rooster without testicles.

What most Members of Congress want is a Speaker with some guts who will drive hard bargains but ones that, in the final analysis, are for the good of the country. This has little to do with partisan philosophy but with strength and credibility on both sides of the aisle. Members in both parties often disagreed with Pelosi on some issues, but they respected her ability to arrive at a solution that served the national interests.

McCarthy’s problem from the outset was that he didn’t know how to compromise without surrendering his basic, core principles.

Both Democrats and Republicans have often complained about the power of the House Rules Committee, acting in concert with the Speaker, to structure debate in a way that overly restricts the offering of floor amendments. However, there is a balance to be struck here to ensure partisans on both sides of the aisle don’t “filibuster by amendment” and block important legislation for getting a final vote. I served on the Rules Committee for 26 years and saw both Democratic and Republican Speakers use this power to come to a final result on the floor.

McCarthy has been willing to give a minority of his own party veto power over major legislation through the rules of the House and veto power of his tenure as Speaker. A real Speaker (like Pelosi and Gingrich) would never give away the store to get the title “Speaker” while making it impossible to do the people’s business.

In addition, he has made a major concession that flies in the face of the lesson Republicans should have learned from their mid-term election debacle. He has promised that a future Speaker McCarthy would not financially support moderate candidates running against far-right fringe candidates in Republican primaries. The anticipated Republican wave never materialized in the 2022 midterm election because numerous safely Republican races went to the Democrats as the electorate voted against far-right extremists. Instead of steering the caucus back toward a more moderate Republican majority willing to govern, McCarthy is ensuring that the very group that is making his life miserable is going to grow! We have the debt ceiling vote looming on the horizon during the second half of this year, and a Republican caucus beholden to their fringe element may just be chaotic enough to drive the country’s economy over the cliff.

Let’s hope that however this drama ends, our country has a Speaker who retains enough power to pass legislation in the time of crisis for our country. If the public doesn’t like the final legislative result, it can always vote for the other party in the next election. That’s the beauty of having elections for the House every two years.


Read More

A hand casting a vote in a ballot box for an election

A hand casting a vote in a ballot box for an election in the Kentucky, USA

Getty Images

Kentucky’s Independent Voters Are Growing. Why Are They Still Shut Out?

Kentucky’s political establishment has just been handed a number it should not be able to ignore.

In July, more Kentucky voters registered as independent or “other” than registered as Republicans and Democrats combined. More than 8,500 Kentuckians registered to vote, and the “other” category grew by 2,530 voters, compared with 2,483 new Republicans and a decline of 32 Democrats.

Keep ReadingShow less
US Supreme Court

US Supreme Court, Washington, DC

Getty Images

If You Can’t Win, Disrupt

On Monday, the Supreme Court issued a decision overturning the stay issued by Judge Talwani of the US District Court for Massachusetts. The case was brought by 23 states and the District of Columbia to enjoin Executive Order No. 14399, issued by President Trump. The Executive Order (EO) was 90 pages long and is entitled “Ensuring Citizenship Verification and Integrity in Federal Elections”.

The purpose of the EO according to its proponents is to (1) enhance the verification of the citizenship status of the voting public and to explicitly prohibit non-citizens from registering to vote or vote in federal elections; (2) to utilize the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), the Social Security Administration (SSA) and the Systemic Alien Verification for Entitlements program (SAVE) to assist in verifying identity and voter eligibility. (3) Establish the transmission of state citizenship lists and prioritization of investigations and prosecutions related to election fraud. (4) Require the US Postal Service (USPS) to issue new rules on mail-in and absentee ballots. (5) Have the Secretary of Homeland Security, the Commissioner of the SSA, and the Postmaster General, in coordination with the Secretary of Commerce, to effectuate all relevant aspects of the implementation of the Order. (6) Enforcement authority for this EO is vested in the Attorney General.

Keep ReadingShow less
Capitol building in Washington, DC

Government reform

Getty Images

Why One Young Engineer Rejects the Two‑Party Binary

When Joshua Summers was in elementary school, his dad would come to class to perform science experiments. One time, they did an experiment to show how lightning bugs lit up.

“That was pretty cool,” he says. There was never one moment that drew him to science, but it may have helped that his mother was a nurse and his father was a mathematician.

Keep ReadingShow less
people in a boardroom


Happy female entrepreneur with colleagues sitting at a desk in an office

Getty images

Understanding The Dissolution of Federal DEI Offices and Initiatives: Debate and Implications

This nonpartisan policy brief, written by an ACE fellow, is republished by The Fulcrum as part of our partnership with the Alliance for Civic Engagement and our NextGen initiative — elevating student voices, strengthening civic education, and helping readers better understand democracy and public policy.

Background

Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) is a buzzword often used in political spaces, and its implementations, or lack thereof, have repercussions on many groups. Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion efforts are organizational policies and initiatives that aim to equitably distribute opportunities and to create accepting workplaces for marginalized populations. These policies create hiring and recruitment guidelines to hire, retain, and promote individuals from those backgrounds. Supporters of these policies argue they are necessary in driving meaningful social progress, while critics argue they subordinate the role of merit in awarding opportunities.

Keep ReadingShow less