On Wednesday, Republican lawmakers selected Rep. Steve Scalise (R-Louisiana) as their preferred choice for the next speaker of the House of Representatives — but Scalise received the endorsement under very narrow terms, meaning that he likely won’t be able to win the speakership if it were immediately put to a vote.
Any candidate for speaker must obtain a majority vote in the chamber in order to assume the role. Because there are currently two vacancies in the House of Representatives, Scalise must secure 217 votes in order to get the job.
Republicans currently have 222 seats in the chamber, which means Scalise can only afford to lose four votes from within his conference, assuming that every Democrat in the House votes against him.
The GOP conference vote took place on Wednesday afternoon. Scalise, who is currently the House Majority Leader, faced off against Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio). While Scalise obtained a majority of votes within his own party, the count was closer than usual, with him winning by a margin of 113-99 — or only by roughly 53 percent of his conference’s vote.
It’s likely that some of the votes against Scalise will switch over to him, as some Republicans viewed their pick during that meeting as a preference, and plan to support the eventual winner no matter what. Jordan has said that he will give a speech in support of Scalise when the full House convenes a vote. Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Florida), who spearheaded demands to oust former House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-California), has also indicated that he is backing Scalise’s candidacy.
But the drama in the House continues to beleaguer Republicans, as the official speakership vote (which had been planned to take place just after the conference selection) was scrapped indefinitely when it became clear that Scalise didn’t yet have the votes to win. Republicans are likely hoping to avoid an embarrassing repeat of what happened earlier this year, when it took 15 ballots across multiple days for McCarthy to win the role.
Scalise seems to recognize the precarity of his current position — despite winning a majority of votes from his own conference, he did not make any media appearances following his win, and chose not to give a speech afterward.
Several Republicans have indicated that they will not back Scalise. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Georgia) has said that she would vote for Jordan instead, citing Scalise’s recent cancer diagnosis. Others, like Rep. Carlos Gimenez (R-Florida), have indicated that they are still upset about McCarthy’s removal, and plan to vote for the former speaker during at least the first round of voting.
Rep. Lloyd Smucker (R-Pennsylvania) said that it was foolish to back Scalise’s candidacy, citing the fact that Scalise was part of the same leadership team as McCarthy. “The House GOP Conference is broken. So we oust Kevin McCarthy and all other leaders are rewarded with promotions?” Smucker said on social media. “How does that make sense or change anything?”
Others pointed out Scalise’s sordid history, including the fact that he once reportedly described himself as “David Duke without the baggage” and attended a white supremacist conference that was hosted by the former head of the Ku Klux Klan.
“I personally cannot, in good conscience, vote for someone who attended a white supremacist conference and compared himself to David Duke,” Rep. Nancy Mace (R-South Carolina) said.
Moderate Republicans are also turned off by Scalise over his votes against certifying the 2020 presidential election on January 6, 2021, and his refusal since then to acknowledge that the race wasn’t stolen.
Embattled Rep. George Santos (R-New York) has said that, due to no direct contact from Scalise after the conference vote on Wednesday, he would be voting for “ANYONE but Scalise.”
“Come hell or high water I won’t change my mind,” Santos added.
At least a dozen Republicans — and perhaps more who haven’t vocalized their position — have indicated that they won’t vote for Scalise for speaker of the House, which is three times greater than the number he can afford to lose if he wants to become speaker.
It’s currently unclear when a vote to choose the next speaker will take place. Democrats in the chamber have said that they expect only an hour’s heads-up before a vote, which the GOP conference can call at any time.
Other lawmakers have noted that a vote may not happen even by the end of this week. “I don’t think it’s gonna happen in a day. I think it’s gonna be less than a week or two,” Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Kentucky) said.
Truthout Is Preparing to Meet Trump’s Agenda With Resistance at Every Turn
Dear Truthout Community,
If you feel rage, despondency, confusion and deep fear today, you are not alone. We’re feeling it too. We are heartsick. Facing down Trump’s fascist agenda, we are desperately worried about the most vulnerable people among us, including our loved ones and everyone in the Truthout community, and our minds are racing a million miles a minute to try to map out all that needs to be done.
We must give ourselves space to grieve and feel our fear, feel our rage, and keep in the forefront of our mind the stark truth that millions of real human lives are on the line. And simultaneously, we’ve got to get to work, take stock of our resources, and prepare to throw ourselves full force into the movement.
Journalism is a linchpin of that movement. Even as we are reeling, we’re summoning up all the energy we can to face down what’s coming, because we know that one of the sharpest weapons against fascism is publishing the truth.
There are many terrifying planks to the Trump agenda, and we plan to devote ourselves to reporting thoroughly on each one and, crucially, covering the movements resisting them. We also recognize that Trump is a dire threat to journalism itself, and that we must take this seriously from the outset.
Last week, the four of us sat down to have some hard but necessary conversations about Truthout under a Trump presidency. How would we defend our publication from an avalanche of far right lawsuits that seek to bankrupt us? How would we keep our reporters safe if they need to cover outbreaks of political violence, or if they are targeted by authorities? How will we urgently produce the practical analysis, tools and movement coverage that you need right now — breaking through our normal routines to meet a terrifying moment in ways that best serve you?
It will be a tough, scary four years to produce social justice-driven journalism. We need to deliver news, strategy, liberatory ideas, tools and movement-sparking solutions with a force that we never have had to before. And at the same time, we desperately need to protect our ability to do so.
We know this is such a painful moment and donations may understandably be the last thing on your mind. But we must ask for your support, which is needed in a new and urgent way.
We promise we will kick into an even higher gear to give you truthful news that cuts against the disinformation and vitriol and hate and violence. We promise to publish analyses that will serve the needs of the movements we all rely on to survive the next four years, and even build for the future. We promise to be responsive, to recognize you as members of our community with a vital stake and voice in this work.
Please dig deep if you can, but a donation of any amount will be a truly meaningful and tangible action in this cataclysmic historical moment. We are presently looking for 182 new monthly donors in the next 24 hours.
We’re with you. Let’s do all we can to move forward together.
With love, rage, and solidarity,
Maya, Negin, Saima, and Ziggy