GOP Has Egg On Face After House Votes Fail

GOP Has Egg On Face After House Votes Fail

GOP Has Egg On Face After House Votes Fail

One of the biggest frustrations about the current GOP majority is that they simply do not act like the majority, and they cannot get unanimity on issues that should be easy.

For example, the vote to impeach Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas fell short yesterday. And I mean just short – the vote was 214 for impeachment, 216 against. What happened? Well, Steve Scalise missed the vote because of his cancer treatment schedule, there are vacant seats that were previously Republican, and then there were defectors.

The count was initially tied after Reps. Ken Buck (R-Colo.), Mike Gallagher (R-Wis.) and Tom McClintock (R-Calif.) voted with Democrats against impeaching Mayorkas. Republicans, including Green, spent spent several minutes huddled with Gallagher on the floor, in an apparent effort to change his vote. One person close to the conversation, granted anonymity to speak candidly, said members argued to Gallagher that he would be inviting strong blowback from the base.

Instead, Rep. Blake Moore (R-Utah), the vice chair of the conference, flipped his vote to “no” — a procedural step that will let Republicans revive the impeachment articles, which some indicated could happen next week if Scalise returns. Johnson’s spokesman, Raj Shah, said in a post on X that the GOP “fully intends” to bring them back up “when we have the votes for passage.”

A frustrated conservative Rep. Ralph Norman (R-S.C.) said: “Ken Buck is leaving. I don’t understand that. He could have done it just for the Republican party.” He noted Democrats seem to stick together and “we don’t.”


Also worth noting:


This entire exercise is beyond aggravating. Why did Speaker Johnson bring this to a floor vote without the votes in hand? We all know that Mayorkas has zero interest in doing his job and has allowed the border to become an open sieve, while the Biden administration fights with Texas because they are trying to patch up the holes. Democrats are now having to admit that the administration has failed on the border. Impeachment probably would not result in a conviction in the Senate, but are we trying to send a political message or not?

And to top that off, the standalone bill for aid to Israel also failed to pass yesterday. Speaker Johnson is batting a thousand this week.

The tally was 250-180 — short of the two-thirds majority needed to pass the measure — with critics in both parties joining forces to quash it.

The stunning vote marked a defeat for Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.), who has opposed Democratic efforts to combine new Israel funding with other security provisions, including aid for Ukraine, and sought to pressure Democrats into swallowing the Israel piece as a stand-alone bill.

Instead, Democrats voted overwhelmingly against the measure, siding with their counterparts in the Senate — who are still fighting for a broader foreign aid package — and President Biden, who had vowed to veto the bill if it reached his desk.

Johnson’s gambit was also undercut by conservatives in his own GOP conference, whose opposition had nudged the Speaker to put the bill on a fast-track course — setting the threshold for passage at the higher two-thirds level — and whose “no” votes on final passage ensured it didn’t hit that mark. The conservatives were protesting Johnson’s decision not to offset the Israel funding with changes elsewhere in the budget, meaning the aid would have added to federal deficits.

Here’s the problem with the conservative strategy – Joe Biden had already promised to veto the bill. Does anyone really think, as wedded as Biden is to getting Ukraine funding, that he would spontaneously change his mind and sign the Israel bill? If the Republicans had stuck together to force Biden to veto it, that makes Biden own the decision. Johnson already put forward a bill that had the spending offsets, and that one failed as well. This Israel funding bill had two purposes – to try and get the funding, and to expose the Democrats for being willing to put Ukraine over Israel. Thanks to the idiots in the House, we can’t even get that moral point across. Yes, Johnson should put it up and try it again, this time without the fast-track. But what on earth made him think that the vote would be successful if he fast-tracked it?

But lest you think that GOP leadership is doing better elsewhere, think again. Mitch McConnell is not having a good time right now, either. He first supported the Senate border bill, but has caught so much blowback that he’s had to admit that the bill is going nowhere.

Though McConnell touted the work of Sen. James Lankford (R-Okla.) and the bill’s endorsement by the Border Patrol union, he conceded what was obvious by Monday night: This legislation is dead.

“The reason we ended up where we are is the members decided, since it was never going to become law, they didn’t want to deal with it,” McConnell said in the interview. “I don’t know who is at fault here, in terms of trying to cast public blame.”

I have no idea what kind of drugs Lankford has been on to put his name and reputation on this crap sandwich, but it was no surprise that McConnell, who is a big fan of omnibus spending crap sandwiches, jumped on board. POLITICO claims that if Trump wins the election, McConnell will be facing another challenge to his leadership. That’s not the reason why McConnell, age almost 82, is likely on his last term as leader in the Senate.


One can respect McConnell’s political savvy of the past, especially when it comes to the judiciary, while also pointing out that it is past time that the octogenarians of government should be headed into retirement. Especially when the cognitive or motor issues are becoming more obvious. McConnell has a seat in the Senate until 2026. There is no reason he should be GOP leader for that same length of time.

Despite the upswing in poll numbers for Donald Trump, the GOP is in disarray at pretty much every level. Leadership is going to need to pull itself together in order to prove that the Republican party can actually be functional and effective heading into the November elections. The last few days have not exactly inspired much confidence.

Featured image: GPA Photo Archive on Flickr, cropped, Attribution-NonCommercial 2.0 Generic (CC BY-NC 2.0)

Written by

9 Comments
  • John Shep8 says:

    Other than symbolism what is the purpose of impreaching him. The Senate won:t convict him.

    • GWB says:

      The purpose is to attempt to remove him from office. Just because someone else won’t do their job is no reason for you to not do yours.

  • Cameron says:

    Basically, they need to act like Democrats. We lost a vote? Fine; we’ll bring it up again tomorrow.

    • GWB says:

      We’ll bring it up next week. And in the meantime we will be getting your constituents to burn down your phone lines demanding you do the right and conservative thing.

  • John Shepherd says:

    Impeaching Mayorkas may make you feel good but it is dead on arrival in the Senate. Cameron say start acting like Democrats. Well, the GOP is acting like Democrats in the Reagan years wasting their time on futile symbolic gestures. Winners don’t waste their time on gestures

    • Cameron says:

      Please point out the exact passage in the rules of impeachment that say you don’t do it if you can’t win. And no “But my feelings” is not an answer.

      And the irony of you talking about empty gestures when the dems tried impeaching Trump on made up charges is not lost on me. They didn’t have the votes and they still lost. Twice.

      • GWB says:

        I thought it was 3 times? Or didn’t the third one pass the House?

        • Cameron says:

          Twice. And both failed. The adorable think was I was chatting with a liberal who actually believed that impeaching him meant that the election was void and Hillary would be sworn in.

  • GWB says:

    GOP Has Egg On Face
    Why? Because the machine laughs at failure? Because they didn’t achieve a party machine triumph?
    How about just noting that they failed at what they wanted to accomplish (which is the right thing, btw) and it was because some Republicans are traitorous toads who evidently wouldn’t know conservatism if it bit them on the a**?

    Gaetz’s tantrum continues to pay dividends for Democrats
    Can we please stop with this crap? Gaetz did NOT throw a “tantrum”. He insisted that Republicans have a leader who actually advanced Republican and conservative principles. What good does it do to have Republicans in charge if they don’t actually act like conservatives?

    Why did Speaker Johnson bring this to a floor vote without the votes in hand?
    BECAUSE YOU HAVE TO ENTER THE RING TO FIGHT. Why is this so hard to understand? This isn’t a video game where you only have so many political power crystals and you have to hoard them for some magic moment at the end of the game. You need to fight constantly to get the right thing done. You might need to hoard some power for a big thing (like… Oh, I don’t know, maybe impeaching someone like Mayorkas?) but you get as many bites at the apple as you can manage. And it makes your constituents feel like you’re actually trying to do the right thing, rather than the thing that simply keeps you as the loyal opposition and invited to the nice parties in DC.

    The conservatives were protesting Johnson’s decision not to offset the Israel funding with changes elsewhere in the budget, meaning the aid would have added to federal deficits.
    IOW, they were acting on conservative principles. Wow, imagine that.

    Johnson already put forward a bill that had the spending offsets, and that one failed as well.
    Nothing in that paragraph about why it failed. Was it because of louses in the Republican party who weren’t conservative? Or was it because the bill didn’t contain enough offsets?

    But what on earth made him think that the vote would be successful if he fast-tracked it?
    He might have thought that if enough votes supported it for fast-track, then he had enough votes to override a veto.

    GOP leadership … Mitch McConnell
    Well, Mitch has never been a conservative leader. He has been a significant part of the problem for conservatives trying to advance a conservative agenda for quite a number of years now. He is the epitome of the party machine – happy to be the “loyal opposition” if it keeps him buddies with the rest of the elite over there, and keeps the money flowing from the public fisc.

    Though McConnell touted the work of Sen. James Lankford (R-Okla.)
    Another non-conservative Republican, injuring the republic for the sake of retaining power.

    the octogenarians of government should be headed into retirement
    It’s not his age that is the problem. It’s his constant efforts to remain the “loyal opposition” party leader, instead of working to advance the conservative agenda and conservative legislators.

    Leadership is going to need to pull itself together
    NO. The people need to purge the leadership that is not interested in advancing the principles of a constitutional free republic. The people need to stand up and demand their representatives be men of conservative principle. And they need to stop expecting some political savior who will solve their problems for them.

    Don’t be mad at Johnson or “the party”. Be mad at the people who keep electing non-conservative Republicans who then betray our principles when in office. Be mad at McCarthy for his tantrum. Impeaching Mayorkas is the right thing to do, and they need to keep pushing it. It just might force out some more of those political animals who just want to grow gov’t at a slightly lesser rate than the Democrats. (It seems to be having an effect on McConnell.)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Subscribe
Become a Victory Girl!

Are you interested in writing for Victory Girls? If you’d like to blog about politics and current events from a conservative POV, send us a writing sample here.
Ava Gardner
gisonboat
rovin_readhead