Only One Way for Congress to Get Rolling

March 5, 2024

Congress has been forced to resort to a revolutionary concept if it hopes to achieve anything of importance.  It’s called bipartisanship.

The ball got rolling last month in the House of Representatives when members of the centrist Problem Solvers Caucus, made up of equal numbers of Republicans and Democrats, introduced the latest attempt to improve border security and at the same time provide weapons to Ukraine and other allies.

This bipartisan legislation is constructed around a pragmatic quid pro quo, the purpose of which is fully evident.  Neither major provision of the legislation could be enacted on its own.  Put the two together and the chances of passage improve significantly.

Then on Sunday, negotiators emphasized the bipartisan nature of half a dozen bills they were introducing to fund six federal departments for the rest of the fiscal year. The compromise legislation was hammered out by appropriators representing both political parties from both the Senate and House.  Each side got some of its demands and gave up on others.

Our Common Purpose has been contending since last summer (read more here) that with a small bloc of ultra-conservative legislators holding out at every turn, the only possible way for the closely divided House to get anything done is to work across the aisle.  Some number of Democrats must join with Republicans to provide the necessary number of votes.  And the only way for that to happen is to write legislation that is acceptable to both sides.

It surely is what the public wants to see.  Asked in a recent Our Common Purpose survey whether on controversial legislation we should fight it out or work it out, a whopping 93 percent said work it out.

Congress seemed to have adopted that philosophy last summer when President Biden and then-Speaker Kevin McCarthy brokered the bipartisan deal to provide debt-ceiling relief.  But working together lasted for only a heartbeat.  The House quickly reverted to its habitual partisan ways in ham-handing the federal budget for the fiscal year that began on Oct. 1.  The chamber has lurched from one stopgap measure to the next during months of impasse.

In desperation, congressional leaders have suddenly realized all over again that they aren’t going to get anywhere without working across the aisle.  Before celebrating too much, let’s acknowledge the obvious.  Legislative leaders aren’t having some kumbaya moment.  They’re cooperating out of necessity. But that’s something.

The stakes are high.  The only way that aid for Ukraine, or border security, is going to pass is with bipartisan support.  The only way the budget is going to pass is with bipartisan support.

Left to their own devices, a large majority of lawmakers seem amenable.  Once they were given the green light by party leadership, the House approved debt ceiling relief last summer by the resounding majority of 314-to-117.  In line with that, the Wall Street Journal reports that very near the same numbers favor the Ukraine/borders bill.

The rather large hurdle being that legislators need to be given the opportunity to vote on it.  And something is going to have to give for that to happen.

The direct method would be for House Speaker Mike Johnson to swallow hard and bring the measure to the floor.  Even that likely would require that he get enough support from Democrats on preliminary procedural matters to overcome the objections of the House’s ultraconservatives.

The last time that happened, it didn’t end well for the person in charge.  Outraged by then-Speaker McCarthy’s maneuvering on the debt ceiling deal last summer, a tiny minority of ultraconservatives acted out for a week, effectively halting all business in the House.  They subsequently managed to oust McCarthy.

Democrats, who long had been exasperated by McCarthy and didn’t trust his intentions going forward, could have come to his rescue but didn’t.  That doesn’t necessarily mean they wouldn’t jump in to save Johnson.

Hakeem Jeffries, the House minority leader, told The New York Times that if Johnson were to do the right thing and put the matter up for a vote, “there will be a reasonable number of people in the House Democratic Caucus who will take the position that he should not fall as a result.”

Also lurking in the background, although not yet in evidence, is the potential objection of Donald Trump.  His opposition was enough to scuttle the Senate’s attempt to do much the same things.

If Johnson can’t muster the inclination or the gumption to move forward, there’s an alternative.

Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick (R., Pa.) and his fellow sponsors of the Ukraine/borders bill have begun working to file a discharge petition, a rarely used device which allows 218 members of the House to go around the Speaker to bring a measure directly to the floor.

The prospect of such could give cover to Johnson for green-lighting the measure or at minimum pressure him to do so.  Failing that, it remains to be seen whether Fitzpatrick and others would actually buck their own party’s leadership in the interest of achieving what many regard as the greater good.

This is not the first of this kind of opportunity to come up since last summer, and none of those came to pass.  Either Johnson or Fitzpatrick is going to have to stick out his neck if this one is to succeed.  It’s the only way the U.S. will be able to provide more support to Ukraine, and the only way we will tighten up the border.

The House once again stands on the precipice.  It can fall back into the ditch or it can work together to achieve something significant.  Let’s hope it doesn’t blow this.