Jake Sherman: What McCarthy Told Me

Welcome to the Bulwark Podcast. I’m Charlie Sykes big news day, and we are joined on the podcast today by Jake Sherman, founder of Punch Bull News Jake has been covering national politics for more than a decade focused on reporting on congress, congressional leadership, the politics of legislating He is the co author of the book. The heel to die on the battle for Congress in the future of Trump’s America, which was published back in two thousand nineteen, He is also a contributor to NBC News, and most importantly, he’s a guest on today’s podcast. So, Jay, First of all, good morning. Thank you, Charlotte.

Good morning to you. Actually, see that’s fake news right there because it’s we’re recording this in the afternoon. And you are talking to us from the congressional press gallery? Right.

The house periodically press gallery in the capital. Yes, sir. So we can hear the

ink stained wretches moving around behind you. The digital the digital stained wretches, Charlie. We don’t even have much ink anymore. Well, first of all, obviously, you’ve been a very, very busy guy with the launch of punch bowl news and you have had a very, very big week. Let’s dive right into the the scoops that are really shaping the news over the last twenty four hours.

Your interview with Kevin McCarthy who had some rather extraordinarily things to say about the the debt limit, Ukraine, and immigration. So where should we start with Kevin McCarthy suggesting that he intends to use the debt limit to force certain spending cuts changes in entitlement programs. So tell me about what Kevin McCarthy told you.

Charlie, this is a a pretty constant message when a Democratic president is in the White House for Republicans, which is they want to use the statutory borrowing limit the debt ceiling lifting it. They want to extract some sort of policy concessions from the president. It’s unlikely to work because the president’s not gonna go along with that, but it it does portend to fight. Between Republicans and Democrats when it comes to the debt limit. And as we know, generally speaking, the debt ceiling is like a credit card.

Right? I mean, you gotta pay your credit card bills. But Republicans dating back to John Behner in two thousand and ten have used this must pass mechanism to extract policy changes. But in the Trump administration, the debt ceiling was lifted three times on three separate occasions. And there were no corresponding cuts or reforms or anything of that nature.

And Republicans kinda just let it go. So this is a return to the the strategy of old, I would say, for McCarthy. And we’ll have to see if he follows up on it. He set the bar quite high. And it’s gonna be very difficult for him to follow through on this.

Okay. So what specifically is he talking about holding up the debt ceiling for what kinds of changes in Medicare and Social Security on the chopping block? Well, he he he said to be sure he said he doesn’t wanna predetermined whether entitlement

spending will be in the mix. Mhmm. Now as we all know or many people who follow public policy know, that mandatory spending spending on entitlement programs like Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security does tend to be kind of the the driver of much spending in the federal government. There’s only so much you could cut around the edges. I mean, you could cut the military, which Republicans don’t wanna do.

There’s all sorts of things you could cut, but entitlements is where Republicans have tended to go. Now McCarthy is not a policy person. Back in twenty ten, twenty eleven stretching into twenty fifteen, sixteen, seventeen, eighteen, Republicans had a bunch of really heavyweight policy people, Paul Ryan, who you know obviously

know

quite well — Mhmm. — who authored Republican plans to alter Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security who was very fluent in those programs. McCarthy is not and that doesn’t mean that nobody is but he’s just not been driven by the policy end of the political equation. So I’m not sure that he knows at this point that’s not to say he doesn’t. I’m just not sure that he does.

But it does, again, this should be a warning signal to the White House. Just because the White House think and and many people think Republicans are illegitimate political actors does not mean that they might not control that they might control the House of Representatives. And if they control the House of Representatives, they have levers of power that they could try to use to extract policy changes. So this is what Catherine Rampell in the Washington Post wrote about all

of this. You know, she talks about it as, you know, hostage taking basically, you know, framing hostage taking is a commitment to physical restraint. But she writes, this the debt ceiling has nothing to do with new spending. Rather, it’s a somewhat arbitrary stature trade cap on how much the government can borrow to pay off bills it has already incurred through tax and spending decisions that Congress has already made Refusing to raise the debt limit is that going to the hospital, ordering the lobster in a five hundred dollar bottle of wine, and then declaring yourself financially responsible because you skipped out of the check. Actually, it’s worse than that.

And she says, look, if lawmakers do this, they tarnish the creditworthiness of the United States, can make it more expensive for federal government to borrow in the future, worse, they might actually blow up every other financial market on Earth too. So what what McCarthy is signaling is that basically they’re prepared to play a game of political and financial chicken next year. That’s right. And and and given the nature of of the caucus, that strikes me as even more dangerous than when John Behner played with that, say, back in two thousand eleven, and it and which resulted in

US credit downgraded for the first time ever? Yes. That’s right. This this conference, this House Republican conference, is gonna be much more absolutist. Than it was in twenty ten, in twenty eleven when we had some of these major inflection points over the debt limit.

And the thing is, again, McCarthy is setting the bar quite high. He is suggesting that he is going to do this and he has, again, limited chance for success. I I have a very and and quite quite honestly, if we’re reading the political tea leaves a little bit more here, Biden and the democrats have an argument to make that, you know, and they will make this argument. You could be sure as sure as you could be that they’ll make the argument that Republicans are playing games with with the nation’s fiscal health. And McCarthy even said to me that he needs Republicans need to raise the debt limit.

He said that. I mean, he he does concede that, I mean, Bainer, in twenty eleven, when I interviewed him, I remember in Ohio, he kind of even said, maybe we won’t raise the debt limit. And that’s that’s that was quite alarming to people in the Obama administration at the time. But you’re absolutely right. This is this should be of concern, of tremendous concern to the White House, which will need to find a way forward with McCarthy.

So if the Biden White House reading your report knowing what may be coming, understanding the consequences And and and maybe this is just purely speculative. Well, it is purely speculative. Is there any way that Democrats can avoid this or the White House avoid this. Is there anything you can do in the lame duck session to make this cup pass because the the whole statutory debt limit thing is a completely artificial construct? Or are we just stuck with having to play go through this kabuki dance, you know, car crash every couple of years.

If they were smart, they would lift the debt limit through the twenty twenty four election in the lame duck. And they can do regardless But, yeah, of course, they can do that regardless of the outcome. What what Republicans did in the Trump era, I can’t remember which time it was, is they didn’t lift the debt limit by a number certain. They suspended the debt limit until a date. That is one mechanism you could use, statutorily, you could say, the debt the national debt limit is suspended until January first twenty twenty five or January thirtieth twenty.

You know, you could push it out a long way and then avoid this fight completely, which by the way, if you put McCarthy on truth serum, he would probably say that’s a good idea. Now you could they could try to eliminate the debt ceiling. There’s been talk of that in the past. That’s not gonna work. And I don’t think there are sixty votes for that.

Maybe they could they could they couldn’t do it in a reconciliation package, I don’t think. But they do have mechanisms in the lame duct to do this. And a lot of people think it would be quite wise if they avail themselves of those opportunities. Well,

a little bit later because you you make an interesting point that maybe in his heart of hearts as Kevin McCarthy wouldn’t mind, you know, having this taken off his agenda. Because in a lot of ways, He will also, as speaker, would be held hostage by his own caucus. We can talk about his relationship with that caucus in the role of Marjorie Taylor Green in a moment. But let’s get to the other big story that came out of your your report. And I guess, I would argue even bigger than the one we just we’re we’re talking about.

The suggestion that getting additional aid from a Republican house for Ukraine would be very, very difficult. He told you I think people are gonna be sitting in a recession and they’re not going to write a blank check to Ukraine. They just won’t do it. It’s not a free blank check. And then there’s the things the Biden administration is not doing domestically, not doing the border.

If people begin to weigh that, Ukraine is important, but but At the same time, it can’t be the only thing they do and it can’t be a blank check. So let’s talk about that because that seems to be channeling a lot of the rhetoric that we are hearing in right wing media among activists, what I would call the anti anti Putin kind of rhetoric So how worried should Ukraine and the supporters of Ukraine be about a Republican house that that that will in fact have the power of the purse

trends? Very concerned. For a few reasons. Number one, McCarthy is reflecting a growing sentiment inside of his conference that sending money to Ukraine is not something they should be doing as frequently as they are. That’s number one.

Number two. McCarthy is part of the, you know, gang of aid it’s called, which is the top lawmakers in each of the rep the House Republicans Democrats Senate Republican Senate Democrats, plus the chairs and top minority members of the Intelligence Committee. So McCarthy understands what’s going on in Ukraine better than probably that group understands better than anybody. Not I’m not saying McCarthy does, but Pelosi, and and and McConnell and and and Schumer and McCarthy. They they understand and McConnell you know, they all understand this.

So that all being said, he

and

he might have in his leadership team, Jim Banks, who is somebody who’s generally seen as a some version of a defense hawk. Now we’ve been basically spending five billion dollars a month on Ukraine. And if the administration wanted to, and they have I have gotten signals that they may do this. They could just say we need sixty billion dollars in the lame duck. And we need this before Republicans take control if Republicans do indeed win the House.

We need this money now because we can’t be certain Republicans are gonna do it. If they’re in power. That would be wise if I were advising the Biden administration or senate when house Democrats or anybody who cares about the aid that we’re giving to Ukraine. Because I think internally, it’s gonna be very difficult for McCarthy to get Ukrainian pass. And remember, Congress is going to fund the government likely.

They’re likely gonna fund the government. Through September thirtieth of twenty twenty three during the lame duck. So there isn’t going to be that kind of hinge moment where they’re gonna have the ability to give more money to Ukraine. It would have to come as a stand alone piece of legislation. That becomes very complicated for McCarthy.

So they can take this issue off the table if they wanted to in the lame duck, and that would be wise. If if I’m if I’m if I’m sitting in the White House, today, that would be wise. Again, an avoidable problem that the Biden administration could kind of take off the table.

Okay. This isn’t urging because, you know, you have these two very dangerous potential crises, but you’ve also then explained how, in fact, they could be avoided during the lane. The third major line of your reporting today is McCarthy promising a hard line on immigration. This seems to be pretty unsurprising. The Republicans would be opposed to a pathway to citizenship or or Daka in change for increased border security.

So how would that actually play out though legislatively? Is this just going to be gridlock or is there a potential compromise between the Biden administration, which has obviously been, well, I think they’ve been kind of flailing on the border. But do they have the ability politically to negotiate with a hard line Republican caucus? A

few thoughts here. Before I talked to McCarthy for this interview, which was last week during a trip through the Midwest, which by the way included someone from your home state who you probably know Scott Fitzgerald. Sure. Who was involved involved in I believe the senate president for a period of time in Wisconsin, a long period of time. I thought that, listen, Republicans clearly want to secure the border.

They want the wall Trump screwed that up so much during his administration. He made it all about himself. We can get it. We could do an entire podcast on that. Mhmm.

And it was never able to get done even though Democrats had voted for it in some way, shape, or form for, you know, nearly twenty years beforehand. Right? So we can concede all of that. So if Republicans are gonna start using that as a, we need the border secured, we need a wall, we need this, we need that. I thought there would be room for some immigration deal.

I I thought it was a very narrow space, and I thought it would have to be a lot narrower than what Democrats have wanted in the past. Now now that McCarthy has taken this position, I’m a lot more bearish on the prospect of anything big happening or anything small happening. McCarthy is essentially saying that trade that we all know we all are aware of the very obvious trade on immigration, which is some form of daca slash pathway slash legalization documentation in exchange for some level of border security, not wall everywhere, obviously, but wall drones, all those things. That was that is the obvious trade. Now Republicans have basically taken that off the table.

I don’t see where they go. McCarthy is saying the border needs to be secure before we talk about any of this. And, again, I’ve been covering Kevin McCarthy for his entire federal career pretty much save a couple years. He has not always been this hard line on immigration. This is a new look for him in the last five or six, seven years.

So this is where the Republican Party is now, Charlie. And I I don’t and and the big problem for them is I I and I’m and you do too. I know that, but I talk to a lot of people in business and and we just did an event yesterday in Miami with Francis Suarez, the mayor of Miami. And he’s very pro immigration reform. We had some business owners at the event.

They’re very pro immigration reform. Business is big and small. Want immigration reform in some way, shape, reform. McCarthy is signaling that it’s not in the cards if the Republicans take the house.

So we go play horse race of who’s gonna take the house. Let let’s continue to work under the assumption that Republicans are gonna take the house. And Kevin McCarthy obviously wants to be the the speaker. It matters tremendously, how big the majority is, clearly. I guess, my question to you guys be, and I know you’ve been studying this and thinking about this.

Being speaker of the House of Representatives is actually one of the shittiest jobs in Washington. I mean, it really is the they’re herding cats and it has destroyed, you know, so many careers. It’s not really a stepping stone. You think about what happened with John Bain or what happened to Paul Ryan. I asked somebody last week, can you name the last successful speaker of the house?

And they said, well, I don’t know, maybe Denny has a hazard, which is, like, really I mean, kind of big asterisk there. You know, how much power would a speaker Kevin McCarthy have as opposed to being held hostage to a caucus dominated by people like Marjorie Taylor Green and bomb throwers like Lauren Beaubert. There’s a

lot to unpack there. Yeah. I would argue the most powerful, most effective, best speaker we’ve had is Nancy Pelosi. She’s been speaker for a long time. Whether you like her policy or hate her policy, you’re a student of legislating, you have to say Nancy Pelosi is incredibly successful.

There’s no way around that. But what you said is absolutely right, destroyed Paul Ryan and destroyed John Bain or both men who I’ve seen that various events around the country in the last couple years. I ran into Paul Ryan in an airport the other day. Both men are much happier. Now that they are not speaker of the house and that they have moved on to greener, both fiscally greener and and emotionally greet her pastors.

Now McCarthy in his interview with me, he even said, he acknowledged that it’s a shitty job and he acknowledged that it’s a very tough circumstance and people wanna just knock you off and take credit for all the hard work. And Something that struck me recently and and I just spoke to Nancy Pelosi a couple hours ago is that the leaders of these parties do so much Pelosi McCarthy, McConnell Schumer, to raise the money, to organize, to have all these organizations in their constellation kind of working in unison, rowing in the same direction. And then some, nobody says, well, you shouldn’t be the leader. It’s it’s it’s it’s a difficult thing to imagine for a leader. And I think McCarthy spends a lot of time thinking about that.

I do think McCarthy will be speaker if Republicans win the majority. Now will it be difficult if there’s a five seat majority? Yes. It will be very difficult. The larger question is how long does it last?

I mean, Bainer was beaker from ten to fifteen, Ryan was beaker from fifteen to in the beginning of nineteen. It’s not a long term proposition. McCarthy’s fifty seven. He’s been in Congress since two thousand and six. I think one of two Republicans elected in two thousand and six to the House.

So the other Republican that my memory serves me well was Peter Roscom, who was in leadership and is no longer in Congress. So It’s not a job with much longevity. It’s really not. And shifting to bo people like Beau Burton and Marjorie Taylor Green, it seems inevitable. I mean, I don’t I I don’t know what he could give them.

We actually have some news that we’ll be that we’ll be reporting shortly about McCarthy’s view on investigations things of that nature. But it is it is fair to say that he’s gonna have to play Footsie with them in some way shape or form if both of them return Congress. Bobert’s got a little bit of a race. Marjorie Taylor Green does not. It it’ll be difficult to see what he gives them.

Does he impeach somebody? My my guess is is, I don’t know, at this point, to be honest with you. And McCarthy is elevated green. He had her at their big policy rollout in Pennsylvania a few weeks ago. So, I mean, it’s he it’s it hurts cats is the best way to think of it.

And you have people who are serious lawmakers all the way to the showman and show women, I guess, all of whom need to be coddled in some way for lack of a better term, they need to be coddled, and it’s very difficult. Howard Bauchner: Well, and

it’s it’s compounded by the fact that that not only might he be held hostage by members of his own party, you know, by the by the KUKA. I and back back ventures, but also he has to worry about the former president, exile down in Mar a Lago, because he’s always one, you know, truth social slash tweet away from having the right turn against him. So he he really, you know, has to be looking over both shoulders. Doesn’t he? And I and I guess this This is Will, where his speakership, it is different will be different than Nancy Pelosi’s because the nature of Republican politics is quite frankly quite different than the nature of Democratic Party politics.

Isn’t it? I mean, those caucuses really are not mirror images of one another. Not at all. I

mean, people fear Nancy Pelosi. No one really fears Kevin McCarthy in the same way. And it was put to me by our public, I mean, it’s difficult to govern when many of the people in your conference don’t believe in government. Yeah. Don’t believe in the in the functions of a government.

Don’t believe in the traditional strictures and structures and and all of those things of government. So I I agree with that. And I I I think I’m curious obviously how Trump will play in to to this whole this whole situation. I don’t know whether Trump endorsed McCarthy. I have asked Trump before.

I I’m due to ask him again at some point soon. I imagine. I we don’t really cover Trump at punchbone news because he’s not in government — Right. — and he doesn’t have a huge impact on legislating, which is our focus. But he might have an impact on on the speaker’s race.

But I’ve gotten signals from that world that he will be with McCarthy. We’ll have to see about that, but those are the signals I’ve gotten. And that could be completely wrong because as you know, Charlie, no one in that world has any idea what is gonna do besides Trump himself. And I’m not even sure he knows what he’s what he’s gonna do. Yeah.

We we

ought to deploy the word mercurial more off but you make an interesting point there about, you know, the number of members of the caucus that are have no interest in government, no interest in legislation whatsoever. I suppose the poster child for that up until now would have been somebody like a Madison Hawthorne. You know, and also all of the incentives now in politics have changed. I keep thinking about that seen from John Bainner’s book where he sort of realized that, you know, power had shifted when, you know, Michelle Bachman asked for a committee assignment that was absolutely absurd And of course, he was gonna say no to her and she says, well, I’m just gonna go to the, you know, host and fox, and they’re gonna put pressure on you. And really, that was one of those moments where you realized that that the locust of power had shifted from, say, the legislative establishment to the entertainment wing And if anything, will you tell me, that’s accelerated?

I mean, there are Margaret Taylor Green being a perfect example. It doesn’t matter whether she serves on any committee or passes any distillation, that’s not her ticket to becoming a rock star. Is it? And they all know that, that they don’t have to play the game in order to become rich, powerful, and famous.

That’s right. And that that committee was the intelligence committee that Bachman wanted on and Bing her eventually did did put her on the intelligence committee. Yeah. That’s right. I mean, The difference I would argue is that McCarthy has done a lot more to keep those people it depends how you look at it either at bay or in line.

He has done more to kind of toss them bones much to the chagrin of a lot of people who don’t believe they should be tossed any bones. And that’s been a difficult thing for people to watch, but he has a much closer relationship with the right wing of his conference. Than did Bainer and Paul Ryan and has a much more open door policy. And we’ll have to see if Republicans win the House, whether that means anything, whether that gets him anywhere, and whether that’s that’s a a plus for him or a negative. Okay.

So we’ve gone

through the debt ceiling, Ukraine, immigration, you know, if I was making a list of pretty solid predictions for Republican congress next year, I would also say multiple impeachments and wall to wall investigations of starting with Hunter Biden and filling out you know, you said you had some more reporting coming on that. I don’t want you to scoop yourself here, but that that seems inevitable and it seems like irresistible. That they will demand these investigations, these impeachment

votes? I

think they will demand investigations. I’m not entirely sure on the impeachment front, and I wouldn’t be surprised, but I think the investigations will be very, very quick and very intense on all the topics you mentioned and some topics to be honest with you that even Democrats want answers on the the withdrawal from Afghanistan. Origins of COVID. I think there’s some Democrats who would say privately that they think those are legitimate. That doesn’t mean that Republican investigations are gonna be legitimate.

That just means those topics are not as crazy as some of the other topics they’re envisioning. So I and some of this, Charlie, as you know, is is standard fare for a minority party when there’s a president of another party. We we watch John Vayner’s house go after the stimulus package go after Fannie and Freddie go after I mean, all sorts of

things. Bengazi.

Bengazi is one is one of the more extreme ones. Not extreme, and the topic was extreme, but just many elements of it, which we don’t have to get into now were extreme. So yes, I think that will be a hallmark of this Congress. And that’s why I think that it would be smart for them to do the debt ceiling early because it’s not as if spending is the animating issue of this majority or this majority that may or may not happen. The centerpiece that is is quite honestly some of these investigations and and and the idea that

they will be a check, so to speak, on the Biden administration. Will there be payback retaliation against the January sixth committee investigations? So I don’t think so. I don’t feel

hearably confident about that. But I think that the committee will sunset, and then that’s that. And it sunsets at the end of this congress. Remember, several people on that committee are not gonna be around. Stephanie Murphy’s not gonna be around.

Adam Kinzinger’s not gonna be around. Liz Cheney’s not gonna be around. It’s unclear if only, and Lori is gonna be coming back. Mhmm. So a lot of people are gonna be gone.

So I don’t think so, but I don’t feel confident that there won’t be some pressure to strip somebody like a Betty Thompson of a Prime Committee slot because of his his involvement in the committee. Well, then there’s also been

some talk about, you know, going after Eric’s swall well or Adam Schiff. I mean, it depends how how ginned up they are about the the issue of payback. Is there any you know, regret internally on Kevin McCarthy’s part about the way he handled that committee that the fact that he essentially, you know, went without any representation on the committee that that did seem like a blunder or do they see of it that way? Well,

I think there it was a blunder, and I’ve made that clear to McCarthy, and I’ve had him respond to that on on various occasions. I mean, even if you’re McCarthy, you lost your ability to have visibility into the committee. Right. Even if you think it’s being conducted in a sham manner, which I I don’t concede that point. I don’t think it is.

I I think you could have problems with if you I mean, there are certain things that they could have legitimate crime not many, but they could have some legitimate creds and some things. That all said, he would have had visibility. The original construct, Charlie, you’ll remember, on this committee is that Republicans actually had veto power over the the subpoenas. He he said no thanks to that, and then pulled his members off when when Pelosi didn’t allow Jim Jordan, Jim Banks in the committee. I think that was silly.

I think that was a silly decision for him to make. I’ve been pretty public with that. I think it’s not been smart. And Trump doesn’t think it’s been smart to the extent that matters to McCarthy. I don’t know.

But they lost all ability to have any sort of eye on this committee and participation in this committee. And so they’ve been on the sidelines, which has been really silly. So

I have been thinking a lot about nineteen ninety five. After the Republicans swept into power in the election of nineteen ninety four with the contract with America. New gingrage riding high. So it looked like the the Clinton administration, you know, it suffered devastating defeats And yet, what happened was that the Republicans found out very quickly that you cannot govern from Congress The presidency is not irrelevant no matter what happens in the midterm elections and they overplayed their cards. And in fact, the Clinton’s use this as a way to boomerang back to success two years later in the election.

Obama’s, you know, the Obama administration. Beaten very badly. In twenty ten, Republican overreach in fighting contributed, I would say, materially. To Obama’s reelection. Is there any sense among congressional Republicans that they could screw the pooch on this?

That their majority their majority could in fact be very much a pure victory? Yes. Yes and no. I think I

think if you talk to them honestly, they understand some of these investigations don’t pull well. And when I was on the trail last week with McCarthy, I mean, he even said on several occasions, remember if we win the majority, we will still have Joe Biden in the White House. It’s not as if we’re gonna be able to get everything done that you want us to get done and you have to stick with us. Which is a message that is not surprising to hear, but it’s interesting to hear. I mean, to the extent they do stupid things like potentially default on the debt, shut down the government, overreach on investigations, of course, that has the potential of helping Joe Biden in twenty twenty four.

But, I mean, if you look at the kind of the basics of the economy right now, yes, unemployment’s low, yes, there are positive indicators in the in the economy. But there is a global inflation crisis, which is really hurting, hurting people all over the world. And that has to rebound. Combined, I would say, it doesn’t have to. What would be helpful for Democrats is if that rebounds, in addition to the fact that Republicans screw up or do some stupid stuff, which they’re inevitably gonna do.

There’s no question about it. I mean, parties that come in in elections like this always mess up in some way, shape, or form.

Yeah. They always mess up unless they had this almost preternatural sense of restraint. Don’t overpromise. Don’t go too far. But back to this question of of what sort of latitude Kevin McCarthy has to resist those pressures because you know, again, you have the, you know, the bomb throwers who are thinking that they’re gonna be in the driver’s seat.

I mean, you know, Margaret Hitler Green, you know, saying, you know, today that if if Kevin McCarthy wants to be successful, he’s gonna have to, you know, give me a lot of stuff, a lot of power. Well, that’s gonna make it hard then to to tamp that down if in fact they are making constant demands, you know, be angrier, go further. If you have these missiles raining down from Maranalago, go after this guy or pass this crazy ass bill. You know, the other thing I would say, Charlie, is there’s one important thing to think about. The

pressure that that kicked John Vayner out of the speakership, the lever that Mark Meadows at the time used, was the motion to vacate the chair, which initiated an immediate referendum on the speaker of the house. That vote never happened. But at that point, any member of Congress could initiate that horrendum. That has been taken away. Mhmm.

That can only be called up by a party leader at this point. So that kind of pressure of losing your job is not the same as it was then. So McCarthy has a little bit larger of a leash. And and the argument he’s made is let’s not screw this stuff up. Let’s not do stupid things because then we can’t get the things done that we were put into power to do.

What those things are not entirely clear. I mean, they don’t have a plan to curb inflation. I don’t think even if they had a plan, it would work. Democrats’ plan hasn’t worked as of yet. So listen, that he’s definitely gonna be pushed around by them.

I think he’s cognizant of that. I know he’s cognizant of that from what he’s told me. But he’s hoping that he has the ability given his relationship with the right. He’s hoping that it could be a little bit easier than it was his predecessors. So

let’s talk a little bit about the the next congress. It will be in in many ways potentially quite different than the current congress the Democratic conference is likely to be even further to the left if many of the moderates and swing districts are defeated. The republican conference will be decidedly Trumpier because all of the member virtually every, you know, Republican member Congress that buck Donald Trump has been has been purged. So both of these these conferences will be different and will be further apart. Then then even in we we talk about how bitterly divided this congress is, the next one will be worse in that respect.

Won’t

it? Absolutely. And there’s not much that can be done there. I mean, this is a product of what I think Charlie is the ills of the redistricting process. I think that if I I have no opinions in politics on policy or anything like that besides that, the way that we draw maps is just is dangerous.

It’s crazy. And it promotes people to to run to their polls. Their political polls and to be as extreme as possible. And that’s not healthy. It’s it’s just not healthy.

It’s exacerbated by a million other factors in American politics, but it’s it’s a big it’s a big dynamic that’s taking under consideration. Now that being said, yeah, this is how it’s been for a while. I mean, it started in twenty ten. Many argue it started in two thousand and nine, two thousand and eight. It’s been this way for a while.

There are rare blips in which the two parties get together. But, you know, they’re blips and and that the two parties are quite far apart and will remain so. And you’re right, the Democratic caucus is farther left. The Republican conference is farther right. They’re leaders.

And we don’t know what Nancy Pelosi is gonna do if she’s gonna leave or she’s gonna stay or what she’s gonna do. We have no idea. So all that being said, it’s a pretty uncertain time, I would say, one of the most uncertain times I’ve covered on Capitol Hill.

So what do you think happens to Nancy Pelosi? I don’t know. I don’t know.

I mean, I’ve I’ve been predicting for twelve years that she would go. I think she’s more likely to go this time than any other time that I thought that. There is a real big desire for generational change. I mean, Pelosi, Steny Hoyer, Jim Clyburn, Joe Biden are all in their eighties. You know?

I mean, they’re they’re not they’re not spring chickens. Yeah. I mean, compare that just I’m not comparing the the stature of these leaders or anything but their age. But Kevin McCarthy is fifty seven. Steve’s police is somewhere near there.

Elise Stephanic is in her is in her late thirties or early forties. It’s just a big difference in the two parties right now that their leadership is is is just of two different not only generations, but almost there’s almost a generation between them in many respects. Look, you know

what I mean. I mean, it’s literally unsustainable to continue to have leadership in the eighties. I mean, at some point, I mean, that That’s

something right. And and and nature will intervene at some point. And or and but you know what Pelosi always says is, you want me

gone, run against me, and beat me, and she keeps winning. Okay. So we’ve been talking about the house lot. One last question. So what is the relationship going to be between unless let’s say, that, let’s say, that the Republicans eke out, you know, majority in the Senate.

I’m not making a prediction here, but what is the balance of power and the relationship between Mitch McConnell and Kevin McCarthy? They have very different relationships with Donald Trump. So how does that play out, legislative? I don’t think the Trump thing

matters as much when it comes to them too. I think McConnell doesn’t respect Tom McCarthy’s handled Trump. McCarthy doesn’t respect Tom McConnell’s handled Trump. So that is kind of a a baseline fact. Now that all being said, the interesting dynamic will be that this if if Republicans do take the majority in the senate, which I I

again,

I have no idea whether they will or they won’t. McConnell is going to become the White House’s contact point on Capitol Hill, and you’ll just see the White House try to work around McCarthy and go to McConnell and pass things with McConnell and then tell the house to eat it. And that will be an interesting dynamic. McCarthy and McConnell are not particularly close. They both have a a love of politics and a love of the legislative game and all those things.

They’re not particularly close. They have weekly meetings. They’re fine, but they’re not particularly close. There’s there’s nothing really to say there besides that. There will be more inks build on that in the future.

I mean, probably, I’ll be honest with you. I I was thinking a lot about this today after seeing Dave Wasserman of the Cook political report with Amy Walter on MSNBC say, he thinks fifty fifty is the most likely outcome in the senate. Imagine Charlie for a second — Yeah. — of fifty fifty

senate. Broken

by by Kamala Harris, tie broken, not broken in other ways, but ties break broken by Kamala Harris, and a Republican house. I mean, we’d be in probably the most complex governing time of our of our life perhaps, one of the craziest times from twenty three to twenty five. Twenty twenty three to twenty twenty five, and it’s just gonna be fascinating to watch. Yeah. Just when you think

you cannot get any crazy. Jake Sherman, thank you so much for joining me and spending so much time on a very, very busy day. I appreciate it. Thanks, Charlie. Thank you

so much. And by the way, if

you do not subscribe to Punchbowl, it is very much worth your time and worth your subscription if you want to know what is going on in Capital Health. Congratulations with everything you and your partners have done with punch ball. It’s really quite extraordinary. Thank

you. I really appreciate that.

The Bowler podcast is produced by Kitty Cooper with audio production by Jonathan Siri. I’m Charlie Sykes, Thank you for listening to today’s gold work podcast. We’ll be back tomorrow. We’ll do this all over again.

You’re worried about the economy. Inflation is high. Your paycheck doesn’t cover. As much as it used to and we live under the threat of a looming recession. And sure, you’re doing okay, but you could be doing better.

The afford anything

podcast explains the economy and the detailing how to make wise choices on the way you spend and invest. Afford

anything talks about how to avoid common pitfalls, how to refine your mental models, and how to think about how out a thing.

Make smarter choices and build a better life.

Avoid anything wherever you

listen.