Boehner Will Probably Remain Speaker Today. But If He Didn’t . . .

Today on NRO

VICTOR DAVIS HANSON: Conservatives lament, and liberals brag, that Obama has fundamentally transformed America. Autopilot Nation.

RICH LOWRY: The experts at Harvard are getting the change they believed in — and just listen to them howl. When Obamacare Came to Harvard.

CHARLES C.W. COOKE: Be wary of tasking teachers with screening for 'radicalization.' What To Do with Islamist Toddlers.

IAN TUTTLE: A radical fringe of grievance-mongers protests among the very liberals who greet them with applause. Brunch, the New 'White Space'.

SLIDESHOW: Motor Trend Auto Show.

Morning Jolt
. . . with Jim Geraghty

January 06, 2015

Boehner Will Probably Remain Speaker Today. But If He Didn't . . .

The problem in budget negotiations for Republicans is that a) the public isn't as outraged about wasteful and excessive spending as Republicans and conservatives are; b) the president is a shameless demagogue who commands the bully pulpit; c) most of the media will happily assist the president by blaming Republicans for every school bus full of kids that doesn't get to visit the Smithsonian during a government shutdown.

(Sure, the public may tell pollsters that they don't like wasteful and excessive spending. But they rarely get particularly vocal or motivated about it.)

Those factors bedeviled Republicans before John Boehner was Speaker, they have bedeviled them throughout his Speakership, and they are likely to bedevil them for the near future. Yes, a different Republican as Speaker of the House might be a better public speaker or more charismatic, but it's not likely that he (or she!) could single-handedly overcome the public's short attention span and lack of interest or the media's instinct that all government spending is vital and any effort to cut it is miserly.

This is not to say Boehner has been a great Speaker. There's little doubt that with executive orders and regulatory action, President Obama has made Republicans largely superfluous to the decisions of the federal government, and most conservatives feel Boehner is nowhere near pugnacious enough against a foe willing to ignore the Constitution. Grassroots Republicans feel pretty "meh" about him at best. Some members say Boehner broke his promises to them.

But any House Republican who's got a decent working relationship with Boehner (and probably spent years developing it) isn't going to want to toss that relationship away, particularly without knowing who would replace him as Speaker. And if you're John Boehner, staying on good terms with a majority of your caucus -- not everybody, but 218 or so of them -- is job one.

You may recall breathless reports from December 2012 and January 2013 that a coup against Boehner was imminent. Boehner won 220 votes. The effort to replace Boehner last time around was apparently laughably disorganized; we'll see if this year's effort is any better.

As of Monday night, ten Republicans had publicly said they would vote for someone besides Boehner; another seven had been critical of Boehner in the past or voted against him and haven't said how they will vote. That matches up with Representative Walter Jones' "16 to 18" estimate from about a week ago. That's considerably fewer than the 28 or 29 that the anti-Boehner rebels will need.

Ace wonders if Democrats will conclude Boehner's the best Republican leader they're going to get, and help him out by staying home:

Boehner wins if he has a majority of the votes cast for a Speaker, excluding abstentions. If, say, ten people abstain, then those ten are not part of the count used for determining a "majority." That is, abstentions reduce the number of votes needed to get to a majority.

The point is, if Democrats really want to help John Boehner, a block of them could abstain from voting, thus reducing the number of votes Boehner needs to win (and increasing the number of votes the insurgents need to block him).

The outlook for Boehner would be a lot cloudier if there was an alternative who was well-liked by about 218 or so of his colleagues and who seemed genuinely interested in the job. This person would have to enjoy the trust and faith of the conservatives, while also reassuring less conservative members that his agenda for floor votes wouldn't be endangering them. He would have to have a good feel for the political instincts and worldviews of just about every member, and know their passions and idiosyncrasies. And on just about every issue under the sun, he would have to know exactly what kind of a deal a majority of his members could live with, and what they couldn't.

It's a tall order. And if Boehner wins today, it may very well be that for all of his flaws, a majority of his colleagues aren't yet convinced that any other member can handle that task any better than Boehner can right now.

If you could pick any current House Republican to be the next Speaker, who would it be? (Yes, the Constitution doesn't require the Speaker to be a member of the House, but there's never been a non-member Speaker.)

I asked this on Twitter yesterday and Trey Gowdy of South Carolina appeared to be the default choice of anti-Boehner conservatives. Also getting mentioned: Paul Ryan of Wisconsin, Darrell Issa of California, Jim Jordan, Thomas Massie, Justin Amash of Michigan, Mia Love of Utah, Candice Miller of Michigan, and Joe Barton of Texas

Oh Look, Scott Walker's Touting the Difference Between Wisconsin & Washington

Here's Wisconsin governor Scott Walker in his inaugural address Monday, totally and completely not test-driving a speech for a presidential campaign. No, sir:

Unlike other places around the world, this document says, in Wisconsin, it doesn't matter what class you were born into or what your parents did for a living. Here, our opportunities should be as equal as possible, but the outcomes should still be up to each and every one of us.

In Wisconsin, we understand that true freedom and prosperity do not come from the mighty hand of the government. They come from empowering people to control their own lives and their own destinies through the dignity born from work.

In Wisconsin, we understand people create jobs, not the government. Those who choose to employ—be it one or many—are to be appreciated and encouraged, so as to prosper and increase employment for others in the future.

In Wisconsin, we understand the best way to improve lives and strengthen families, as well as raise wages, is to assist people to get a better education and to acquire more skills. This is how we grow household incomes, while putting people to work.

Since I last stood at this podium, our state has become more free and prosperous. We took the power away from big government special interests and returned it to you—the hard-working taxpayers. More people are working and fewer are unemployed. School scores have improved and more of our students are graduating from high school.

Our retirement system is the only one fully funded in the country. The state's pension and debt ratio is one of the best. And Wisconsin's bond rating is positive.

In contrast to the politicians along the Potomac, we get things done here in the Badger state. There is a clear contrast between Washington and Wisconsin.

We've been good stewards of the taxpayers' money and lowered their tax burden as well. We've shown why the founders of this great nation looked to the states—and not the federal government—as the source of hope for this exceptional country. We will not let them down.

Walker, above, getting used to that swearing-in pose.

Mike Huckabee Is Back. Rivals Beware.

For a long time, the conventional wisdom on Mike Huckabee was that he had leveraged his 2008 presidential campaign into one of the sweetest positions in the conservative movement: a $500,000 per year contract with Fox News that gave him a weekend show where he could opine on the news, interview guests, and play with his band, as well as book deals (including a bestseller), paid speaking gigs, and radio commentaries (separate from his now-canceled radio show). He was influential without much pressure or scrutiny; well-liked and funny and not particularly threatening to anyone else in the conservative movement. He built his dream house on the Florida coast.

Run for president again? And give up all that to spend the winter months staying at the Holiday Inn in small Iowa cities night after night?

Whatever your view on Huckabee's brand of conservatism, give the man some credit -- he's willing to get back into the arena, put in the work, and take the criticism in a bid that, let's face it, does not face great odds.

Ramesh noted that if Huckabee wants to win this time around, he'll have to put serious effort into broadening his appeal to non-Evangelical voters. I'll just add that in person, Huckabee is one of the nicest guys imaginable, and on the stump he effectively uses humor and comes across as a really jovial figure.

But the guy's got a sharp elbow, particularly when it comes to late-campaign tactics. A lot of Republicans could say, "I disagree with the Club for Growth in some areas"; it's another thing to call them "the Club for Greed." He'll announce that he won't run negative ads, and then, during a press conference, show reporters the negative ad he decided not to run -- knowing that the press will effectively transmit the message for free. He's willing to campaign on his faith -- particularly in Iowa -- in ways others might find shameless. He'll stretch the truth when an exaggeration helps him. His opponents will underestimate him and his amiable style right up until the moment he metaphorically kicks them in the crotch.

This may take him far, or it may not. If it doesn't, there's a good chance Fox News or some other network will need a host for weekend slot in 2017.

ADDENDA: Here in the D.C. suburbs, west of the Beltway, Authenticity Woods Public Schools are open. Maybe we learned something from last year's one-snowflake-and-we-close policy.

www.NationalReview.com

Sail with National Review