US Republicans: The Ghosts McCarthy Called

The Democrats in the House of Representatives make serious allegations against the new "Speaker of the House" Kevin McCarthy.

In his stubborn determination to get the highest office currently held by Republicans in the United States, he not only weakened himself, but also the institution.

Indeed, McCarthy, elected for only his 15th round, can only dream of running his faction the way his predecessor, Nancy Pelosi, always ran her Democrats.

He had to make many concessions to the radicals on the right-wing edge of the party, which significantly reduces his influence: the rebels are over-represented in the powerful "Rules Committee", which decides which legislative proposals will be voted on in what form.

Every single member of parliament can introduce a vote of no confidence against the speaker, so he can show him the instruments of torture in every little factual dispute.

And instead of voting on large spending bills en bloc, MPs will probably be able to submit thousands of individual amendments again in the future - which will make deals with the Senate and the White House much more difficult.

Only: Did McCarthy have a choice?

Of course, he could have retired and let another Republican take the lead.

But what would that have changed?

The radicals continued to use their power to impose their ideas.

The only way to avoid the concessions was a pact with Democrats.

But the vast majority of McCarthy supporters in the parliamentary group would not have gone along with that either, and the tumult in the parliamentary group could hardly be imagined.

Hunger for power or steadfastness?

Is it all just hunger for power?

One could also say that McCarthy at least countered the rebels a bit.

The chamber is weakened not because of his persistence, but because of the twenty MEPs who refused to bow to the overwhelming majority in the group.

In this respect, however, McCarthy is also largely to blame for the malaise.

It goes back to the early days of the Obama presidency.

At the time, the jovial Californian was one of the "young guns" in the faction leadership, and after the Democrats' landslide victory he showed himself determined to direct the energy of the right-wing Tea Party movement to the Republicans' mills.

So he traveled around the country supporting radical candidates.

After the expensive Bush years of anti-terror wars, they demanded a leaner state, but at the same time fueled the Kulturkampf and, in an increasingly drastic way, made “the establishment” their own party contemptuous.

Trump rode that wave into the White House, and McCarthy rode with him.

The spirits that he summoned and nurtured in his opportunism will now make life difficult for him - and thus for the state.

It seems like a portent that McCarthy took the oath on January 6 of all days, the second anniversary of the storming of the Capitol.

At that time, the Republican had had a late enlightenment, Trump blamed.

But then he held his finger in the wind and quickly took everything back.

Democratic wishful thinking

However, wishful thinking is also involved when the Democrats are now scoffing at the weak Republicans.

Because they have one more reason to do what they can easily agree on now: show Joe Biden and the Democrats.

Jim Jordan, heavyweight from the party's right wing, supported McCarthy in the election for precisely this reason: in future he will be able to head the Judiciary Committee, which can summon members of the government and in this way take revenge for the Democrats' alleged "witch hunt" against Trump.

A subcommittee is to be set up to investigate what the majority now officially calls the "weaponization of the federal government."

The allegation is that the Democrats have turned the FBI, the judiciary and other federal agencies into political "weapons" against the Republicans.

A committee on the corona pandemic is to address the consequences of the lockdown in the future.

Other committees will look at Biden's son Hunter and his Ukraine deals.

As long as this spectacle delivers good pictures, the Republicans should get along well with each other.

Hard times are ahead of the country when things get serious, and in the House of Representatives that means above all: when money is at stake.

The complaints of the party right about the previous practice are quite justified and are shared by a large number of MPs.

First, the US has long spent more money than it takes in.

Secondly, parliamentarianism is actually undermined if the MPs are only presented with a large expenditure package of thousands of pages a few days before the end of the financial year, which they can no longer open up, but only approve as a whole - or force the country into the next "shutdown". .

This is not normal and was never intended that way.

However, a congress was planned whose members are aware of their responsibility for the country, recognize the majority and work constructively on compromises.

But with nothing but political performance artists who scandalize individual items of expenditure and thus take the entire household hostage, no state can be made.