Republican, who had to go through 15 rounds of voting to be elected, had to compromise with opponents sceptical of sending money to Kyiv
By Josie Ensor, US CORRESPONDENT 7 January 2023
Kevin McCarthy reportedly agreed to spending caps that would limit future aid to Ukraine as part of the deal with ultraconservatives that enabled him to finally be elected as House speaker on Saturday.
Mr McCarthy, a Republican, secured the position in the early hours, following a historic five-day 15-vote fight that brought Washington to a standstill.
His Right-wing opponents from the chamber’s Freedom Caucus, dubbed the “Taliban 20”, wielded their opposition to US aid for Kyiv as part of their justification for voting against him in the first 14 votes.
Representative Matt Gaetz of Florida, one of the most hardline aid sceptics, led the charge against Mr McCarthy’s candidacy for speaker before eventually yielding after an extraordinary confrontation in the chamber.
In scenes shown on live television, Mr McCarthy walked over to Mr Gaetz after the failed 13th vote to beg him to change his mind. Rebuffed, he walked away only for a scuffle to break out behind him as another Republican Congressman, Mike Rogers, lunged at Mr Gaetz.
As he accepted the gavel in the early hours of Saturday, Mr McCarthy, who was backed by former president Donald Trump, outlined the Republicans’ aggressive lines of attack ahead of the 2024 presidential race.
He vowed to “pass bills to fix the nation’s challenges, from the wide open southern border to ‘America last’ energy policies, to woke indoctrination in our schools.”
The election bid by Mr McCarthy, 57, who has served as Minority House Leader since 2019, marked the first time in a century that voting for a speaker has gone beyond one round.
Finally able to take the oath of office, Mr McCarthy swore in newly elected lawmakers who had been waiting all week for the chamber to formally open and the 2023-24 session to begin.
But his protracted fight foreshadowed how difficult it would be for him to govern with an exceedingly narrow majority and an unruly hard-Right faction bent on slashing spending and disrupting business in Washington.
According to reports, to end the impasse, Mr McCarthy agreed a deal that the House would commit to passing bills that would cap all discretionary defence spending at 2022 financial year levels, meaning roughly $1.47 trillion. Congress has passed four emergency supplementals totalling more than $100 billion since Russia’s invasion in February.
President Joe Biden will require Congress to approve any additional military aid later this year. Should one of the rebel lawmakers – who have vowed to oppose any further aid packages – be given leadership roles in the House Rules Committee it could create immense hurdles to passing additional assistance legislation.
The most recent $45 billion package agreed by Congress will not be affected by the new House leadership.
“Haemorrhaging billions in taxpayer dollars for Ukraine while our country is in crisis is the definition of America last,” Mr Gaetz said last month as to why he had stood against Mr McCarthy.
Who’s who in the ‘Taliban 20’
Andy Biggs The “Taliban 20s” defeated candidate for Speaker, he voted against giving medals to the US Capitol police for their actions during the January 6 riot.
Lauren Boebert A controversial Colorado gun-rights activist who narrowly won reelection by only hundreds of votes, she is accused of supporting the QAnon conspiracy theory.
Matt Rosendale A Montana representtive, he backed Donald Trump’s false statements about fraud in the 2020 election and recently voted against US support for Ukraine in its war against Russia.
Matt Rosendale of Montana, another holdout, recently voted against US support for Ukraine, citing what he said were more pressing security needs along the southern border with Mexico.
“This is a harbinger for a protracted legislative paralysis,” one diplomat warned, telling CNN that “the Freedom Caucus – which is not particularly pro-Ukrainian – has just demonstrated its clout.”
Another expressed concern about “the policy concessions McCarthy has to make, and if they are going to affect the US role in the world.”
Mr McCarthy shrugged off suggestions that the concessions could weaken his power.
“That gives me no problem or concern whatsoever,” he told reporters, describing his deal with critics as a “very good” agreement that “empowers the members”.
Here are the thoughts of the putler wing of the GOP, in their own words:
“Right-wing opponents from the chamber’s Freedom Caucus, dubbed the “Taliban 20”, wielded their opposition to US aid for Kyiv as part of their justification for voting against him”
Garbage and also a bit insulting. I live in the US and I heard every concession made and asked for. Support for Ukraine didn’t even come up. Seems the real “Taliban” is working for a foreign country and has an agenda that feeds off ignorance. Journalists shouldn’t cherry pick and than write as though the idea is mainstream.
Garbage.
The Telegraph is a conservative paper that wants a Republican government. It is read even by mainstream socialists and liberals, because it reports only factual information. It does not support the putler/MAGA/Trump wing because support for genocide is incompatible with conservative ideology.
The link you replied to contains only exact quotes. Those who made those terrible comments, rather than attempting damage limitation, have in fact consolidated their positions and represent a lethal threat to Ukraine.
I don’t believe Sir Red is discussing the Telegraph, rather the Republican Accountability Project which is a bullshit organization and here you are quoting them. Why give them the space if perhaps the only reason is to promote your own narrative.
Not quoting them; I’d never heard of them. I was simply quoting the words of the putlerites.
The Republican Accountability Project article is simply quoting a number of Republicans, including a number of U.S. Representatives who are members of the “Taliban 20”. They provide a link to the source for each quote. Where do you see “bullshit”?
I don’t believe Sir Red was referring to the Telegraph but rather the bullshit organization known as the Republican Accountability Project. It’s a horseshit filled org and here you are promoting their nonsense. .
Why is the Republican Accountability Project BS? You can trust them on Ukraine.
They are just against Trump. Remember what Trump said:
“I went in yesterday and there was a television screen, and I said, ‘This is genius.’ Putin declares a big portion of the Ukraine — of Ukraine — Putin declares it as independent. Oh, that’s wonderful,” Trump said in a radio interview with “The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show.” “He used the word ‘independent’ and ‘we’re gonna go out and we’re gonna go in and we’re gonna help keep peace.’ You gotta say that’s pretty savvy.”
It’s not BS to be against such an opinion. Sorry.
“I heard every concession made and asked for. Support for Ukraine didn’t even come up.”
Did you hear McCarthy agree to cap defense spending to levels of 2 years ago? Where do you think all that military equipment is coming from – the farm bureau?
“as though the idea is mainstream”
It doesn’t need to be “mainstream” – in fact, the Republican Accountability Project article starts out saying “Only 5 percent of Republicans support Russia over Ukraine”. But if the “Taliban 20” is opposed to aid to Ukraine, and they have McCarthy’s balls in their pocket, I think that’s a problem.
Liked
Except that an agreement to cap discretionary spending, as RedSquareMaidan accurately commented, does not in any way specifically address Ukraine, and still allows all sorts of flexibility in how future aid packages to Ukraine are structured. If such a cap limits funding for frivolous and misguided things, such as training the US military on microaggressions and appropriate usage of gender pronouns, so much the better.
The Bloomberg article you mention talks only about the possibility of such a cap, and that it is “being discussed”, which means that it is still unknown what the effect will be on defense spending in general, and specifically on aid to Ukraine.
And I agree that using the term Taliban in connection with internal Republican opposition to McCarthy’s candidacy for Speaker of the House is inappropriate and insulting. McCarthy has shown himself to be a squish and too friendly by far to leftist Democrats undermining American freedoms and traditions, and it is only to be expected that some Republicans would agitate to elect a better candidate.
Personally, I am all for increasing aid to Ukraine and giving Ruzzia a sound kicking that will last a generation, but unfortunately, all Democrats, and some Republicans too, spend taxpayer money so freely and so unwisely, that it engenders in some quarters strong resentment to any unchecked government spending. Unfortunately this resistance bleeds into good causes as well.
Yeah sorry. The post about the Bloomberg article was removed. There is some kind of censorship here going on in a big way!
Don’t criticize house Republican y’all or you will be erased (says the site)!
I am tired of the NEGATIVITY FROM YALL ABOUT THE REPUBLICANS….I am a republican and support the aid to Ukraine like MOST OTHERS. We just need accountability, is that beyond yalls ability? Don’t SWAY MY SUPPORT OR OTHERS when yall are think that the only aide yall get is from DemocRats. REMEMBER, what obama and biden sent yall in comparison to what TRUMP SENT YALL, TRUMP SENT WEAPONS OF DESTRUCTION! DON’T LOOSE YOUR REPUBLICAN SUPPORTERS BY BELITTLEING US!! IF you DELETE THIS, you are saying you do not want my REPUBLICAN SUPPORT. Be careful about that for, I have a lot of followers who I can speak negative of your comments!!
You are welcome to comment here whenever you like. Only don’t make threats. And try to use caps sparingly. Otherwise it looks like you are RANTING.
You use “y’all” like a southerner, but don’t demonstrate the traditional courtesy of a southerner, which is paradoxical.
Good to know that you are one of the
95% of Republicans who support Ukraine. Albeit perhaps a little grudgingly in your case? Any criticism you might see of Republicans is aimed solely at the 5% who support putler; some of them unfortunately are quite prominent.
Here are some of them, in their own words:
Two of my favourite Republicans; Roger Wicker and Lindsay Graham, are southern gentlemen. I just wish there were more like them.
I’m a southerner, but have little use for Graham. Graham is often as nasty as they come, and he is unreliable. It’s great that he is for supporting Ukraine, but he can reverse that if it is suddenly to his advantage to do so.
I hope you’re wrong Sir Ohengineer. I believe Graham has always supported Ukraine and pray he continues
“TRUMP”
LOL. Trump would have been willing to hand Ukraine to Putler on a silver platter in exchange for his name on a hotel in Moscow.