Bizarro GOP Plan: Cut Health Spending to Pay for an Unpopular War

Our most recent book is The Comeback: The 2024 Elections and American Politics. The second Trump administration has been full of ominous developments -- now including a war in the Middle East.

In early February, a YouGov poll found majorities of Americans supported increasing government spending on veterans (74%), Social Security (69%), Medicare (67%), aid to the poor (64%), Medicaid (59%), and the environment (52%).   Only 34% wanted to increase defense spending -- that that was before the Iran war, which is unpopular.  Last week, Pew found 61% disapproved of Trump's handling of the war, and 59% said that US made the wrong decision to use military force in Iran.

In that light, the House GOP's spending plans sound politically insane.  Peter Sullivan at Axios:

Republicans are considering reductions in federal health spending to help pay for a budget bill containing as much as $200 billion to fund the Iran war and immigration enforcement.

Why it matters: New efforts to rein in health programs are sure to be controversial and open the GOP up to election-year attacks that they're cutting health care to pay for an unpopular war.

Driving the news: Top House Republicans are looking at health care offsets addressing fraud in federal programs, as they did during last year's debate over the budget law that made deep cuts to federal Medicaid spending and imposed first-time work requirements.

A Bad Day for the House GOP

Our new book is titled Divided We Stand: The 2020 Elections and American Politics.  Among other things, it discusses state and congressional elections. 

The 118th Congress has been rough on the House GOP.

 Sahil Kapur at NBC:

Friday began with House conservatives holding a press conference to trash the $1.2 trillion spending bill their leaders negotiated with Democrats, sparking some fears about its prospects.

It squeaked through — requiring 67% of the House, it ended up winning 68% — but a majority of Republicans voted against it.

It was just the first headache of the day for House Republicans as they adjourned for a two-week recess, offering a distillation of the infighting and disenchantment that continues to plague the party 15 months into its narrow majority. Things were about to get worse.

Moments later, far-right Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., shocked her colleagues by filing a motion to overthrow Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., blasting his stewardship of the chamber and threatening renewed turmoil at the helm of her party.

...

In the afternoon, Rep. Mike Gallagher, R-Wis., the rising star who recently said he’ll retire from Congress, announced he’ll be quitting early — on April 19. His move will further thin the GOP majority and risks leaving Johnson with a one-vote margin in the coming months.

Within moments of Gallagher’s move, House Appropriations Chair Kay Granger, R-Texas, made the unusual decision to step down early from her powerful post, asking Johnson to replace her as chair of the committee that doles out federal funding “as soon as possible.” In a letter, Granger said she has “accomplished more than I ever could have imagined,” and thanked Johnson for stepping up to lead “during a very tumultuous time.”

Granger already said she won’t seek re-election this fall. But her move to relinquish the coveted gavel mid-session highlights the paralysis that has defined the government funding process, which took four stopgap measures and six months into the fiscal year to resolve. The next funding deadline looms at the end of September.

Jonathan Allen and Scott Wong at NBC:

Gallagher’s decision to leave April 19 also means that there will not be a special election to fill his seat. Under Wisconsin state law, vacancies after the second Tuesday in April are filled in the general election, so Gallagher’s replacement will be decided in November and his seat will remain empty until January.

Sometimes Oppo Guys Don't Even Have to Dig

 Our recent book is titled Divided We Stand: The 2020 Elections and American Politics.  Among other things, it discusses the state of the parties. The state of the GOP is not good.  Jordain Carney and Caitlin Emma at Politico: 

House Republicans are heading home early for Thanksgiving recess after a conservative revolt tanked plans to pass more spending bills on Wednesday.

Hardliners sunk any chances of passage for two additional funding bills this week — marking a major setback for Speaker Mike Johnson less than 24 hours after working with Democrats to pass a bill that would thwart a shutdown deadline Saturday.

“It’s odd to me that these are the hostages they take, particularly when a number of them are taking a hostage that is unrelated to their concern. This is retaliation when something doesn’t go their way,” said Rep. Dusty Johnson (R-S.D.), chair of the more mainstream GOP Main Street Caucus.

GOP leadership then canceled the rest of the votes for the week, with Republicans predicting that Johnson’s spending headache won't get any easier once they return at the end of the month.

 

GOP Rep. Roy: I want my Republican colleagues to give me one thing that I can go campaign on and say we did. One! Come and explain to me one meaningful, significant thing the Republican majority has done pic.twitter.com/Es8Sqy4SGj

— Biden-Harris HQ (@BidenHQ) November 15, 2023

The Incumbency Disadvantage

In 2010, the Washington Post reports, Republicans are pursuing a decapitation strategy against committee chairs:

In particular, the GOP has gone after half a dozen or more committee chairmen who had not faced stiff competition in years. It is a double-barreled approach: Republicans think the threat of energetic challengers will propel some veterans into retirement, making for easier pickup opportunities. Or, should they choose to run, the Democrats might find themselves with deteriorated campaign skills, making them vulnerable in what amounts to their first tough race in the YouTube era...NRCC Chairman Pete Sessions (R-Tex.) and his staff crafted the strategy of challenging the chairmen and other veterans along with Rep. Kevin McCarthy (Calif.), the GOP's lead recruiter, who has studied past wave elections in which control of the House flipped. Republicans are taking a page from the Democratic playbook in 2006, when they picked up 31 seats and reclaimed the majority.

The Hill reports that pork has become toxic:

The landscape for earmarkers in Congress has changed dramatically this election cycle.

Appropriators from both parties have become the hunted, losing primary races to challengers more hawkish about reforming the provisions lawmakers insert in spending bills to steer money to specific projects in their districts or states. Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-Texas) was derisively dubbed “Earmark Queen” by GOP gubernatorial primary winner Gov. Rick Perry’s supporters. Sen. Bob Bennett (R-Utah) was ousted last weekend by two earmark hawks. And Rep. Alan Mollohan (D-W.Va.), the chairman of the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice and Science, lost to a conservative Democrat who questioned the propriety and impact of Mollohan’s earmarks

John Feehery gives some historical context:

It used to be said that there were three political parties in Congress: Republicans, Democrats and appropriators. The appropriators were notorious for protecting their own turf and fighting together to resist the influence of leadership.

But the leadership fought back, threatening to punish those who resisted their entreaties. And the committee became more partisan, less collegial and less effective.

Over the years, the committee gained a reputation not for efficiency or high ethical standards, but as a place where members cuts deals to benefit themselves personally or, worse, to benefit friendly lobbyists.

And as its reputation became tarnished, it became more and more of a liability to serve on the once-powerful perch that used to assure reelection.