Graphic by Yujin Kim ’23/The Choate News
With every change in the control of the House of Representatives, an election is held to determine majority party leadership. This vote, to determine who will be the Speaker of the House, usually happens quickly.
In a break from normal operation, 20 Republican representatives held out voting for Kevin McCarthy, the most popular candidate for House Speaker, in the first two weeks of 2023. Many Republicans and Democrats criticized these outliers for their extreme positions. This group, led by Matt Gaetz (R-FL), Lauren Boebert (R-CO), and Scott Perry (R-PA), had a list of never-ending demands for the potential new speaker.
First, these representatives demanded more rules that would allow party members to challenge the decisions of Speakers, showing a clear mistrust of Kevin McCarthy’s decision making. Another demand was strengthened control at the southern border of the United States. The three representatives also wanted policies that worked toward a balanced budget as the country approached the debt limit once again.
Both Democratic and Republican lawmakers expressed frustration over the pile of demands. Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi tweeted, “Republicans’ cavalier attitude in electing a Speaker is frivolous, disrespectful, and unworthy of this institution.”
President Joe Biden called out the Republicans’ failure to elect a speaker, saying, “I just think that it’s embarrassing that it’s taking so long.”
Lastly, Representative Austin Scott of Georgia noted, “McCarthy earned the right to be the speaker … Any vote against him damages the conference and our ability to govern.” Scott plainly stated, “Those opposing McCarthy are putting their selfish motivations over what’s best for our nation.”
Though these representatives may be on the fringes of the party and the House, some of their concerns have grounding. Among them is a concern about the practicality of House procedures. At the moment, there is no time requirement for when a bill can be submitted before voting on it. This allows members to submit bills just hours before a session, without giving others proper time to read.
For example, according to the New York Times, the most recent 4,000-page federal OmniBus spending bill passed the House on December 22, 2022, shortly after its introduction. The plotlines of the OmniBus bill included spending for the military, education, healthcare, veteran programs, and the like, but it would be unreasonable for lawmakers to read and understand the bill in a day or two.
Moreover, the Republican concerns about a growing national debt are not unfounded. According to the Bipartisan Policy Center, the federal government added $1.4 trillion to the national debt deficit in fiscal 2022 on receipts of $4.9 trillion. The United States is spending 28% more than it takes in every year, piling onto the $31 trillion national debt. To an ordinary citizen, good luck getting a loan at your local bank for your new business venture with a 532% debt-to-income ratio. The banker would kindly offer a “bless your little heart” referral to a credit counseling service.
So, while it’s true that the representatives were operating outside of formalities, their concerns are not unfounded. Reading a consequential bill before voting is not an absurd idea. Wanting to control the national debt is a reasonable action. While we may not agree with every proposal emerging from these so-called radicals, we could all learn a lesson from their proposals.
