Rep. Roy Won’t Rule Out Supporting a Motion to Remove Mike Johnson From Speaker Role Over Spending Deal
“I’m leaving it on the table…I think the speaker needs to know that we’re angry about it. He needs to know that we need to sit down at the table and try to solve this.”
The House Freedom Caucus is ticked over Speaker Mike Johnson’s spending deal with Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer.
Will we see another Speaker vote?
Rep. Chip Roy (R-TX) won’t say no:
“I’m leaving it on the table. I’m not gonna say I’m gonna go file it tomorrow. I’m not saying I’m not going to file it tomorrow,” the Texas conservative said Tuesday on “The Steve Deace Show.”
“I think the speaker needs to know that we’re angry about it. He needs to know that we need to sit down at the table and try to solve this.”
Roy is not the only one:
Rep. Eric Burlison, R-Mo., a hardliner who opposes Johnson’s deal, told Fox News Digital Wednesday morning that he was “not one to start a fight” over his leadership but agreed the option should remain there.
“I think that the motion to vacate is an important measure,” he said. “I don’t think members should take it off the table. Because at the end of the day, my district, people are very frustrated. And if you’re in a situation where… you’re more fearing the moderates than you are the conservatives, that we’re going to… continue to have bad outcomes.”
I have the video cued to start when Chip joins the show.
Roy tweeted yesterday:
.@HouseGOP FAILED to use its leverage to force cuts to inflationary spending
We must reject this "deal" w/ Dems that will INCREASE spending by ~$30 BILLION & fund agencies at war with our liberty & security – like Mayorkas' DHS#NoGimmicks #NoSideDeals #NoSecurityNoFunding pic.twitter.com/XRBmzUshyz
— Rep. Chip Roy Press Office (@RepChipRoy) January 9, 2024
Johnson bragged that the deal sets a $1.59 trillion spending level for 2024.
- $866 billion for defense
- $704 billion for non-defense
“While these final spending levels will not satisfy everyone, and they do not cut as much spending as many of us would like, this deal does provide us a path to: 1) move the process forward; 2) reprioritize funding within the topline towards conservative objectives, instead of last year’s Schumer-Pelosi omnibus; and 3) fight for the important policy riders included in our House FY24 bills,” Johnson boasted.
However…Johnson’s buddy Schumer “pointed to an additional $69 billion as part of a ‘side agreement’ between former Speaker Kevin McCarthy and President Biden in the debt ceiling deal to account for the discrepancy.”
It’s even worse than we thought.
Don’t believe the spin. Once you break through typical Washington math, the true total programmatic spending level is $1.658 trillion — not $1.59 trillion.
This is total failure. https://t.co/QBok5lpa6E
— House Freedom Caucus (@freedomcaucus) January 7, 2024
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
Do it, regular order was promised and not delivered.
I’m missing something as well. In what sense is yet another all-in quasi-emergency “spending” bill at all the way to go?
What’s the point of holding the majority or speakers’ seat if you won’t use it? Spending bills originate in the house AIR. Pass one out of each committee — what, 12 of them? Pass those on a party-line vote with your majority and send to the Senate. Ball’s in their court. Wanna shut down the government, Chuck-y? Does not seem good for the country, or politically astute, but you do you.
The press conferences write themselves:
““What shutdown? We passed spending bills for the whole government.
What stifling government operations? We passed spending bills at previous years’ level for all ongoing operations. We funded exactly what’s been agreed to already. The only people threatening to “shut down the government” as you say are the ones who won’t pass the spending bills — talk to Chuck-y n President Brandon.
What about new programs, policy, or needs? Budgeting for ongoing operations isn’t the place to argue about doing new stuff. We don’t think it’s right to use extortion — threats to stuff people depend on — to force in new stuff nobody’s gotten before in thousand-page spending bills. We don’t think it’s right to bind important new stuff to budgets for ongoing operations, either.
Indeed, we’ve proposed multiple bills for new programs and policies — one per. Our D-Party colleagues walked out of the committees. We’re gonna pass these bills in committee anyway, then throught he House, and our D-Party colleagues can walk out there, too if they want. Then, the Senate can take them up or not — that’s at the majority’s discretion, so they don’t have to walk out. I will point out that the Senate is half and half in elected members. Only the presumption that the VP would always vote with the D-Party faction lets Chucky be de-facto majority leader there, and keep things from getting a vote.
The govt continues to operate, and new stuff gets its day to shine. Seems like winning.
Future policy? We think inflation is killing people’s lives, and deficit spending drives a lot of that. We’re already drafting next years’ spending bills, at 10% reduction from this year’s baseline: policy for a better future.
Exceptional needs? Programs that should not be cut? We are setup to entertain individual spending bills on any issue. Controlling the schedule as the majority, we’ve already committed to prioritize bills like those. Indeed, we have multiple proposed adjustments to consider out of our own caucus already. Those will hit the floor, and many will pass. What Chuck-y and The Screaming-Ds do after that, you’ll have to ask them. (“Chuck-y and the Screaming D’s “– anarcho-punk cover band. Chuck-y performs in makeup: full doll-face.)
We’re all for adjusting spending to meet emerging needs and priorities. We think new needs, changing priorities, or yes, potential savings, deserve their own attention, not buried in massive, one-off appropriations. We also think it’s ridiculous to hold funding for established operations hostage to these new, special concerns that come along. So, we’re managing spending bills to allow that.
When are you running for Speaker? I’ll call my (so-called) reps immediately.
Kind words, thank you.
I think we do what we can. I’m unelectable. BUT, I can put ideas out that seem good to me;
I wonder about something like a fictional-ish diary / blog like the hysterical Fake Steve Jobs blog. Or the more recent, also funny Titania McGrath. The Babylon Bee does something similar as one-offs, with an event and persona. Publius of The Federalist Papers was a persona, perhaps the first political blogger.
The Mugging Progressives who put on fake persona don’t work — they’re too busy mocking, too locked in groupthink to be funny. Baldwin’s Trump is tedious. Brilliant impression. Obvious content. Too much anger and contempt. Colbert’s Dancing Jabs have nothing on Tina Fey’s Sarah Palin in tediousness. Excellent *impression* again. Boring, shallow, and predictable. Though the duo of Fey’s Palin with Amy Poehler as Hillary was screamingly funny… because of how Poehler captured the unspoken Hillary. The neediness. The astonishment. The outrage. The entitlement. The disdain.
I wonder sometimes about something like “The Citizen of a Republic Blog.” Some informed citizen responding to events of the day as if trying to self-govern, for the citizens’ advantage. Maybe start each bit with that setup: “As one of we citizens trying to govern ourselves…” Maybe recurring end: “…and I think that might work out pretty well for us, so there’s that, too.”
Maybe “The Governing Speaker Blog” could be a thing.The running gag is trying to actually govern, or even just run the House. It’s funny because The Feckless R’s haven’t had a speaker who wanted to govern since The Knewtatron.
o yeah … they have a one vote majority… this is not a hill to die on.
Yes it is
No, it is not the hill to die on. Roy pushes for this, say hello to Hakeem Jeffries as SOH.
Would that be any different? They’re still passing the communist agenda regardless.
If you don’t know what would be different, you have no idea how government works. The only thing keeping Democrats from passing amnesty TODAY is not the filibuster. It’s the House of Representatives. The moment they can get a DNC House majority, that filibuster is going away so that they can put Biden’s 7M+ new DNC voters on a pathway to citizenship.
They need to think more than one move ahead this time.
They need to have a qualified, willing replacement in the bag BEFORE pulling the trigger on Johnson.
Agreed.
Then what is? The financial ruin of this country not a big enough hill for you?
That the excuse Repiblicans always use right before they cave to the Dems
I know this won’t be popular here but the best move would be to let the Dems continue to sink themselves with inflationary spending. What’s the motive to do better? So Dems look less stupid and wasteful come election day? That’s exactly how Bill Clinton gained an undeserved reputation of being an economic guru.
If the media refuses to point out the foolishness maybe this is the only way to make people see.
That means letting them destroy what is left of America. That is called, “Cutting your nose off to spite your face”.
Clinton didn’t win because Newt Gingrich made him sign good legislation. Clinton won (both times) because Ross Perot was in the race.
It’s not a crazy idea. Frankly I have been preaching fiscal responsibility, reducing size/scope of govt, reduce military commitments, withdraw from NATO and UN boondoggles, reform/modernize/save Social Security for two and half decades but its been pretty lonely.
Everyone agrees there’s a problem with AMOUNT of spending but everyone also wants THEIR particular program to get more $. So the only thing that happens is more $ for everyone’s pet spending project or ‘vital’ program and now the Federal debt is $34+ Trillion and growing by about $10 Billion per day. Interest alone will cost us more than $1Trillion this year.
Maybe the only way folks will pay attention to the oncoming train is to get run over b/c most don’t seem to understand the scale of what is coming. Social Security shortfall isn’t counted in those numbers nor is the Medicare shortfall. They will be cut by about 25% in less than a decade and folks are still listening to AARP fiction b/c the solutions require shared sacrifice at this late stage and the Silent Gen and Boomers won’t face up to it while most of Gen X counterparts + Millennials and Gen Z know they gonna get screwed no matter what and we are now unwilling to shoulder the whole load to save it for prior generations who resisted any reform when the pain would have been more tolerable.
The same folks keep telling us the financial reckoning is way off down the line or ‘someone will do something’ or worse have convinced themselves that the revenue $ exists to fix it without any social upheaval by redirecting general revenue into SSI to make up the shortfall are in large part the very same folks who wouldn’t let us fix it before it got this bad. Maybe getting that fiscal 2×4 upside their noggin will change their mind b/c nothing else has.
Yep, we’re screwed either way. That’s why I don’t think we can fix the problem, nobody wants to and nobody has the courage. If you even talk about possible reforms that might push back those mandatory 25% cuts, you are a shouted down as wanting to kill Grandma so you know what, fuck them.
why is the debt over $34 trillion and has no cap for another 11 months, the same Johnson that has no spine when it comes to not just cutting spending, not restoring it to pre covid levels. He can claim petty cash cuts with IRS money and unspent covid money, what 25 billion in a 1.6 trillion dollar budget. The military and state department loses that much in a week.
Why is the debt over $34 Trillion? Easy Politicians like to spend money to at its most charitably put influence various constituencies to secure their support. More cynical folks, me included, call it buying votes.
Even with that what’s going on now is unprecedented. The Debt to GDP ratio in 1946, the first year of the post WWII era was 119%. By the time I was born in 1970 that ratio was down to 35% despite Vietnam and LBJ great society spending.
By the mid ’80s the ratio crept up due to Reagan defense build up (necessary) and a recovering economy transitioning off cheap mid east fuel. The ratio crept up to 63% then by Clintons last year stood at 55% with the last balanced budget (even if it was accounting that secured it the effort was made so credit due to Congressional GoP and Clinton for at least making a serious effort).
By the end of the Obama administration the ratio was $105%. By end of DJT term it was 129%. All politicians spend taxpayer dollars some more than others. Sometimes justified WWII as an example. Sometimes less necessary the Global War on Terror lasting 20+ years as an example Sometimes not justified but necessary due to Fed Govt policy mistakes like all the Covid spending under DJT (shutting down the economy was clearly not a good idea but having made people unemployed they gotta spend). Sometimes totally unnecessary and totally unjustified like the insane green new deal packaged as ‘infrastructure’ and even more Covid spending by Biden.
Unless we are prepared to sign on to cutting spending from our own favorite programs the politicians ain’t gonna be willing to try for substantial cuts. They are burned out and tired of beating their head against a wall with little support and a substantial amount of grief. So when the AARP membership is lobbying for cuts to Social Security/Medicare then maybe. When Red State populations demand cuts to AG programs and Defense Spending then maybe. Then the politicians will know we are serious, when we are not only willing but offering shared sacrifice to achieve the goal. Not before.
We have a long history of electing a bunch of weak willed idiots to run the country and then there is an ever larger group of federal employees who are entrenched and run the day to day show that are just as incompetent.
I love to use the example of the CAFE standards that were enacted. On its face forcing the auto manufacturers to build vehicles sounds like a great idea. Problem is that the feds did not offset the improved fuel mileage with more fuel tax revenue by increasing the taxes on the fuel. People were driving the same amount of miles, in many cases even more with the same amount of wear and tear on the roads but because they were taxing the fuel at the same rate they were actually taking in less revenue per mile traveled. We all know that the condition of the bridges and roads has been on the decline for decades. largely because there isn’t the money for the repair work.
WTF is Johnson thinking? Why does that chair turn decent Republicans into RINOs almost overnight?
Because they weren’t really decent to. Begin with
The question is doubly perplexing since Epstein died.
Well, Johnson is the guy the Freedom Caucus and Trump and his supporters all wanted. So they got him. You get what you vote for.
You’re a fool. Johnson was an ugly compromise. No one “wanted” him, and he is not surprising anyone now by fully funding the Dem agenda.
Proving (as if it needed to be proven) that any powerful R is a member of the Uniparty.
The democrats would get their way if they had a 1 seat majority. House controls the power of the purse, use it!
Yes they would
Yes, but it’s a lot easier job to find a person vicious enough to become Speaker than it is to find one virtuous enough.
Johnson is really screwing this up. He should not be talking with Schumer about anything. The people who Johnson needs to talk to are the House Republicans – and that’s it! The Senate will do what they want and if they want to ignore a funding bills from the House and have the feral government shut down then so be it.
I saw Johnson on TV and he was actually trying to brag about “a spending cut of 16 billion” off of a top line of TRILLIONS!! It was pathetic, to say the least.
$2 trillion in “emergency” spending was added in 2020 over the COVID caper – 2 TRILLION – and that expenditure has not come back out of the budget. We need to go to 2019 levels (which were too high, back then, on top of it). Period. There is nothing else to talk about. Emergency funding has to stop.
Further, Johnson cannot allow funding for all of the treasonous, anti-American policies that this administration has been implementing. Those things and the people running them, all have to have their money cut off.
Again, if the dems want to shut the feral government down over this then good for them. We could use a vacation from this oppressive tyranny for a little bit. And if Traitor Joe tries to engineer a debt default (which there is no legal reason to happen) then he is committing a crime and needs to have that added to the articles of impeachment and added to his list of treasonous acts.
Actually, if we really want to fix all of the problems ailing the country we need to go back to 1990 levels of spending at the least
When your outgo exceeds your income,
your upkeep will be your downfall.
That’s where we are now.
.
Rep. Roy should seek to remove Johnson. In the Senate, getting rid of McConnell is also a needful thing.
You mean you’re all urging a “”RINO”” to do your dirty work? What happened to the Gaetz caucus? They started it, let them fix it.
I don’ think most people realize why they keep pushing CRs. All those things they call “emergencies” are added to the baseline budget. The only way to keep them is to pass a CR. $2 trillion in emergency spending? Added to the baseline budget. It never expires. It’s why everyone fights about “regular order”. If you pass a CR you get to keep the baseline budget. There is NEVER a budget cut.