A week after the midterm elections in November, a small group of far-right GOP lawmakers and activists gathered on K Street in Washington, D.C., to discuss strategies to use their narrow majority to extract power in the House. The next Congress, influential activist Ed Corrigan said, could be a “European-style coalition government” run by three groups: “The Democrats, the Republicans and the Freedom Caucus.”
The forum was convened by Rep. Andy Biggs, R-Ariz., and attended by several other lawmakers, including two others who helped block Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) this week from becoming House speaker: Reps. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., and Victoria Spartz, R-Ind.
- Are Republicans still the party of big business? How ‘woke’ companies are trying to get back into Congress
- The Freedom Caucus helped Trump challenge the 2020 election. Next year it wants key positions in Congress.
- Members of a new House committee will have the power to investigate agencies that are investigating them
- Democrats and Republicans make millions trading stock in companies Congress oversees. Why can’t they ban it?
- What the 2022 midterms results — so far — really mean for abortion, Ukraine and the control of Congress
The strategy outlined by Corrigan went beyond just extracting concessions from House leaders — it amounted to a game plan for the House Freedom Caucus to operate as a third party in a de facto parliamentary system, essentially co-governing the chamber with mainstream Republicans. As lawmakers prepared for a seventh round of voting on Thursday, House Republicans appeared to be on the precipice of allowing that to happen.
“What would coalition government look like in practice?” Corrigan asked the group, which was filmed and livestreamed but has attracted little notice beyond conservative media. “I would recommend the Freedom Caucus would be granted a specific number of committee assignments, and committee and subcommittee chairmanships,” as well as a variety of other new powers, including putting a Freedom Caucus member as chairman of the powerful House Rules Committee.
This week, McCarthy has reportedly been conceding to a litany of demands from the Freedom Caucus — including the possibility of placing members of the caucus as chairs of committees and adding members to the House Rules Committee, a move that would help Freedom Caucus members steer how many and which amendments are offered for bills on the House floor, a crucial function.
The episode suggests that the endgame for the approximately 20 hard-right House members who have voted against McCarthy for speaker of the House is more ambitious than merely boosting representation in the House for Freedom Caucus members — it is about securing the Freedom Caucus a say in all decision-making made by the new Republican majority.
Rather than extracting concessions from McCarthy, the actions this week by the small group of breakaway Republicans appear to be following Corrigan’s game plan to essentially co-govern the lower chamber of the legislative branch.
After the midterms, Corrigan advised the lawmakers to leverage House Republicans’ narrower-than-expected majority as a negotiating tool.
The House Freedom Caucus, Corrigan said at the Nov. 14, 2022, meeting, “has extraordinary power to negotiate a leadership arrangement” and urged them to try to extract a litany of concessions from McCarthy, some of which had been floated previously by Freedom Caucus members as they prepared for Republicans to retake the House. Freedom Caucus members should “negotiate directly with the speaker for committee positions for Freedom Caucus members,” as well as “a specific number of committee assignments and full committee and subcommittee chairmanships,” he said.
Corrigan also made a case that the Freedom Caucus should negotiate for the chairmanship of the powerful House Rules Committee, “or at least three of the four members.”
The House Rules Committee determines how many amendments and which amendments are offered on the House floor, granting its members extraordinary power to guide the business of Congress. The rules committee is usually made up of tenured lawmakers and allies of the speaker.
At one point, Meadows suggested what he admitted was a “radical idea”: Lawmakers should “quit appropriating for things that are not authorized,” meaning that any government program that had not been reauthorized by Congress on time shouldn’t get funding until Congress reapproves it. Meadows cited the State Department as an example: Congress has not updated the laws governing the department since 2002.
Rep. Pete Sessions (R-Texas), a former chairman of the Rules Committee who has voted for McCarthy in the fight over House speaker, was also among the lawmakers in attendance. He seemed to suggest at one point that some ideas being floated during the meeting would make it harder for the Republican majority to function.
“In going through this process, we need to make sure the stability of the majority is still there, while somehow holding the leadership accountable,” Sessions said.
In practice, however, “it would be implausible” for the House Freedom Caucus to control the House through its Rules Committee, said Tim LaPira, professor of political science at James Madison University. The Rules Committee represents one small minority faction within the Republican Party, and enactment of rules requires a majority vote in the House. Any other small group of Republicans could join with Democrats to defeat a hypothetical Freedom Caucus-led rules package.
The breakaway Republicans are not likely to be successful in achieving co-governing status with mainstream Republicans, LaPira told Grid. “They have succeeded in showing everybody that they are not willing to govern responsibly,” he said.
The House Freedom Caucus — an influential, invitation-only group of about three dozen of the most right-leaning members of the House, which does not make its member list public — has close ties to CPI.
Members who have voted against McCarthy this week are almost all Freedom Caucus members or were endorsed by the Freedom Caucus’ campaign arm, and many have close ties to CPI. The breakaway group’s choice for speaker on Wednesday, Rep. Byron Donalds, R-Fla., appeared last year in a testimonial video for CPI along with Gaetz and Reps. Lauren Boebert, R-Colo., and Chip Roy, R-Texas, each of whom have supported Donalds’ bid for speaker.
Other members who voted against McCarthy this week include Reps. Matt Rosendale, R-Mont., and Paul Gosar, R-Ariz., who have paid membership dues to CPI, according to FEC records.
The episode also highlights the tensions brewing within the Republican Party.
During the run-up to his bid for speaker, McCarthy forged relationships with some far-right lawmakers, including Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., who has been supporting McCarthy’s speakership bid. Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, the former chair of the House Freedom Caucus, has continued to vote for McCarthy even though he was the breakaway group’s nominee for the speakership during the second and third ballots on Wednesday.
“We are on day 2 and the same Never Kevin group is now on their 3rd Speaker candidate,” Greene posted Wednesday on the social media platform Truth Social. “People are truly beginning to realize they have no plan, and they are sick and tired of ‘trust the plan’ that’s a complete secret and never produces results.”
Trump has endorsed McCarthy’s bid for speaker, yet his political action committee donated $1 million last year to CPI, and the nonprofit is led in part by Meadows, his former chief of staff.
On Wednesday, another CPI leader — its chairman, Jim DeMint — signed on to a statement with other conservative leaders formally calling on the House to pick a speaker other than McCarthy.
CPI did not immediately return a request for comment.
You are now signed up for our newsletter.
- What Ramadan really means to me — and nearly 2 billion MuslimsGrid
- France protests, explained in five words: ‘Life begins when work ends’Grid
- Medical residents nationwide are unionizing. What does that mean for the future of healthcare?Grid
- Ramadan fashion hits the runways. Muslim women say it’s been a long time coming.Grid
- Who is Shou Zi Chew – the TikTok CEO doing all he can to keep his app going in the U.S.?Grid
- The SVB collapse has made deposits more valuable than ever — and banks will have to compete for themGrid
- Ukraine War in Data: 74,500 war crimes cases — and countingGrid
- Can China really play a role in ending the war in Ukraine?Grid
- ‘No Dumb Questions’: What is Section 230?Grid
- Trump steers allies and opponents on the right to a new enemy: Manhattan District Attorney Alvin BraggGrid
- World in Photos: In France, no-confidence vote and fresh protestsGrid
- Bad Takes, Episode 32: The lesson elites should have learned from IraqGrid