Dem
53
Ties
1
GOP
46
There was some very inside-baseball, soap-opera drama on The Hill yesterday. Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) really wants to bring a bunch of bills to the floor, but he did not seem to have the votes for a procedural rule to do so. Still, he either rolled the dice yesterday, or he knew something that House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) did not, because when the votes were counted, the rule to advance the bills to the floor had been approved 210-208. Two Democratic members crossed the aisle, and did so without giving any of their colleagues a heads-up.
The two aisle-crossers were Jared Golden (D-ME) and Marie Gluesenkamp Perez (D-WA). If you had to guess two names, these would be the two you should have guessed. The motivation for their votes was not pork, exactly, but it WAS a different non-kosher foodstuff. Golden, who is retiring, and so did not do this to "make a statement" in advance of the elections, struck a deal where a pro-lobster-industry bill he's been flogging was included in the rules package. Gluesenkamp Perez says she voted as she did in order to support Golden's bill. Presumably that means she was supporting Golden himself, or maybe the people of Maine, because there is no lobster industry in Washington.
Many Democratic members of the House yesterday were very angry at their two colleagues, particularly with the lack of advance notice. And it's not a great look for Jeffries; something like this would be nearly inconceivable under the iron-fisted leadership of Speaker Emerita Nancy Pelosi (D-CA). Still, this will soon pass. Golden, again, is retiring, and Gluesenkamp Perez has a permanent hall pass to be a thorn in the side of her caucus, since that is necessary to keeping her R+2 seat.
Of greater significance, potentially, is that one of the bills that will now come up for a vote is an anti-Democratic Socialists of America messaging bill. Sponsored by the appropriately named Rep. Jeff Crank (R-CO), the resolution is basically a long list of reasons that the Democratic Socialists are evil. If Democrats vote for it, then Republicans running against DSA candidates, or against DSA-friendly candidates, will say, "See? Even the other Democrats hate them!" If the Democrats vote against it, then Republicans running against those Democrats will say, "Hm. I guess my opponent is just fine with de-funding the police."
That said, the Republicans aren't quite as savvy as they might have you believe. In their desperation to kowtow to the Dear Leader, they also jammed a provision in there that calls for the passage of the SAVE Act. It doesn't mean anything; it's just a sop to Donald Trump. However, it gives Democrats cover to vote against the whole measure. "My primary concern is safeguarding elections, and I cannot vote for any bill that puts democracy at risk," they can say. Plus, there's still the amendments process, which affords a chance for some additional blue-team maneuvering.
The House has only a couple of dozen days left in session before it effectively shuts down for the midterms. There is a theory of politics that says, "If you want to do well in the elections, use that time to achieve something substantive." It would seem that Johnson & Co. are more adherents of the, "Nah, a few show bills are more than enough" school of thinking. (Z)