speaker of the house committee assignments

The House’s committees consider bills and issues and oversee agencies, programs, and activities within their jurisdictions.

• Agriculture
• Appropriations
• Armed Services
• Education and the Workforce
• Energy and Commerce
• Financial Services
• Foreign Affairs
• Homeland Security
• House Administration
• Natural Resources
• Oversight and Accountability
• Science, Space, and Technology
• Small Business
• Transportation and Infrastructure
• Veterans’ Affairs
• Ways and Means
• Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence
• Select Committee on the Strategic Competition Between the United States and the Chinese Communist Party
• Joint Economic Committee
• Joint Committee on the Library
• Joint Committee on Printing
• Joint Committee on Taxation

View Committees No Longer Standing from the 117th Congress

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

12.4 House Leadership

Learning objectives.

After reading this section, you should be able to answer the following questions:

• What criteria do House members use when selecting their leadership?
• What roles do the Speaker, floor leaders, and whips play in the House?

The House leadership consists of the Speaker, floor leaders , and whips . Committee chairs also are part of the House leadership, and they will be discussed in Section 12.6 “Committees” , which is about committees. The rules of the House give extensive power to leaders to direct the legislative process.

Leadership Criteria

House members consider a number of factors when choosing leaders. A member’s personal reputation, interactions with other members, legislative skills, expertise, experience, length of service, and knowledge of the institution are taken into account. Members tend to choose leaders who are in the ideological mainstream of their party and represent diverse regions of the country. The positions that a member has held in Congress, such as service on important committees, are evaluated. Fundraising ability, media prowess, and communications skills are increasingly important criteria for leadership. The ability to forge winning coalitions and the connections that a member has to leaders in the Senate or the executive branch are factored into the decision (Peabody, 1976).

Holding a congressional leadership position is challenging, especially as most members think of themselves as leaders rather than followers. Revolts can occur when members feel leaders are wielding too much power or promoting personal agendas at the expense of institutional goals. At times, a leader’s style or personality may rub members the wrong way and contribute to their being ousted from office (Cooper & Brady, 1981).

Speaker of the House

The Speaker of the House is at the top of the leadership hierarchy. The Speaker is second in succession to the presidency and is the only officer of the House mentioned specifically in the Constitution. The Speaker’s official duties include referring bills to committees, appointing members to select and conference committees, counting and announcing all votes on legislation, and signing all bills passed by the House. He rarely participates in floor debates or votes on bills. The Speaker also is the leader of his or her political party in the House. In this capacity, the Speaker oversees the party’s committee assignments, sets the agenda of activities in the House, and bestows rewards on faithful party members, such as committee leadership positions (Carr, 2001).

In addition to these formal responsibilities, the Speaker has significant power to control the legislative agenda in the House. The Rules Committee, through which all bills must pass, functions as an arm of the Speaker. The Speaker appoints members of the Rules Committee who can be relied on to do his or her bidding. He or she exercises control over which bills make it to the floor for consideration and the procedures that will be followed during debate. Special rules, such as setting limits on amendments or establishing complex time allocations for debate, can influence the contents of a bill and help or hinder its passage (Rae & Campbell, 1999).

Speakers’ personal styles have influenced the evolution of the position. Speaker Joe Cannon (R-IL) became the most powerful Speaker of the House by using strong-arm tactics to control members of both parties. “Czar” Cannon’s style so angered his colleagues that he was forced to step down as chairman of the Rules Committee during the St. Patrick’s Day Revolt of 1910, which stripped him of his ability to control appointments and legislation. The position lost prestige and power until Speaker Sam Rayburn (D-TX) took office in 1940. Rayburn was able to use his popularity and political acumen to reestablish the Speakership as a powerful position (Peters Jr., 1997).

Figure 12.5

Strong Speakers of the House, such as Joe Cannon (left) and Sam Rayburn (right), were able to exert influence over other members. Strong speakers are no longer prominent in the House.

Wikimedia Commons – public domain; Wikimedia Commons – public domain.

A Speaker’s personal style can influence the amount of media coverage the position commands. The Speaker can become the public face of the House by appearing frequently in the press. A charismatic speaker can rival the president in grabbing media attention and setting the nation’s issue agenda. On April 7, 1995, Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-GA) made an unprecedented prime-time television “State of the Congress” address on CBS indicating that the House has passed the Contract With America, a plan that proposed extensive changes to the social welfare system and tax policy. Despite the fact that the Contract with America died in the Senate, Gingrich became a “multimedia Whirling Dervish of books, writings, lectures, tapes, and television, spewing out ideas” (Balz & Brownstein, 1996). He was a constant presence on the television and radio talk show circuit, which kept attention focused on his party’s issue platform. This strategy worked at the outset, as the Republicans were able to push through some of their proposals. Gingrich’s aggressive personal style and media blitz eventually backfired by alienating members of both parties. This experience illustrates that the media can have a boomerang effect—publicity can make a political leader and just as quickly can bring him down.

In contrast, Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-IL), who took office in 1999, exhibited an accommodating leadership style and was considered a “nice guy” by most members. He worked behind the scenes to build coalitions and achieve his policy initiatives. After the election of President George W. Bush, Hastert coordinated a communications strategy with the executive branch to promote a Republican policy agenda. He shared the media spotlight, which other members appreciated. His cooperative approach was effective in getting important budget legislation passed (Davidson & Olezek, 2002).

Figure 12.6

Republican John Boehner of Ohio became Speaker of the House after the Republicans took control following the 2010 elections. He replaced Democrat Nancy Pelosi, the first woman Speaker.

House GOP Leader – Leader Boehner (R-OH) and Greg Walden (R-OR) – CC BY 2.0.

Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) was the first woman Speaker of the House, serving from 2006 to 2010. Media coverage of Pelosi frequently included references to her gender, clothing, emotions, and personal style. Pelosi’s choice of Armani suits was much noted in the press following her selection. Syndicated New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd wrote a piece on November 6, 2006, titled “Squeaker of the House.” Dowd alleged that Pelosi’s first act after becoming Speaker was to “throw like a girl” and that she was “making her first move based on relationships and past slights rather than strategy.” “Squeaker of the House” became a moniker that stuck with Pelosi throughout her tenure as Speaker and was the subject of a YouTube parody. Pelosi was replaced by Rep. John Boehner (R-OH) when the Republicans took control of the House following the 2010 midterm elections.

Floor Leaders

The Republicans and Democrats elect floor leaders who coordinate legislative initiatives and serve as the chief spokespersons for their parties on the House floor. These positions are held by experienced legislators who have earned the respect of their colleagues. Floor leaders actively work at attracting media coverage to promote their party’s agenda. The leadership offices all have their own press secretaries.

The House majority leader is second to the Speaker in the majority party hierarchy. Working with the Speaker, he is responsible for setting the annual legislative agenda, scheduling legislation for consideration, and coordinating committee activity. He operates behind the scenes to ensure that the party gets the votes it needs to pass legislation. He consults with members and urges them to support the majority party and works with congressional leaders and the president, when the two are of the same party, to build coalitions. The majority leader monitors the floor carefully when bills are debated to keep his party members abreast of any key developments (Sachs, 1996).

Figure 12.7

Rep. Eric Cantor (R-VA) became House Majority Leader following the 2010 midterm elections. Cantor’s web page features multiple means of reaching out to citizens, including links to Facebook and a TwitterBuzz feed.

Wikimedia Commons – public domain.

House Majority Leader

See the House Majority Leader’s web page at http://www.majorityleader.gov/ .

The House minority leader is the party with the fewest members’ nominee for Speaker. She is the head of her party in the House and receives significant media coverage. She articulates the minority party’s policies and rallies members to court the media and publicly take on the policies of the majority party. She devises tactics that will place the minority party in the best position for influencing legislation by developing alternatives to legislative proposals supported by the majority. During periods of divided government, when the president is a member of the minority party, the minority leader serves as the president’s chief spokesperson in the House (Carr, 2001).

Figure 12.8

Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) became House Minority Leader after she was replaced as Speaker of the House by Republican Rep. John Boehner (R-OH) following the 2010 midterm elections. Pelosi’s website does not mention her status as minority leader.

Members of Congress from the Republican and Democratic parties elect whips who are responsible for encouraging party loyalty and discipline in the House. Aided by extensive networks of deputies and assistants, whips make sure that the lines of communication between leaders and members remain open. In 2002, whip Steny Hoyer (D-MD) greatly expanded his organization to include forty senior whips and thirty assistant whips to enforce a “strategy of inclusion,” which gives more members the opportunity to work closely with party leaders and become vested in party decisions. This strategy made more party leaders with expertise available to the press in the hopes of increasing coverage of the Democratic Party’s positions. Whips keep track of members’ voting intentions on key bills and try persuade wayward members to toe the party line (Davidson & Oleszek, 2002).

Key Takeaways

An extensive leadership structure provides an organizational framework that helps House members work effectively if not efficiently. At the top of the leadership hierarchy is the Speaker of the House, who is the body’s presiding officer. Majority and minority leaders help set their party’s agenda on issues. The whips encourage party unity on House votes.

• What is the House Rules Committee? What makes it important to controlling what legislation gets through the House?
• How do the roles of Speaker of the House and majority leader differ? What do party whips do?

Balz, D. and Ronald Brownstein, Storming the Gates (Boston: Little Brown, 1996), 143.

Carr, T. P., “Party Leaders in the House: Election, Duties, and Responsibilities,” CRS Report for Congress , October 5, 2001, order code RS20881.

Cooper, J. and David W. Brady, “Institutional Context and Leadership Style: The House from Cannon to Rayburn,” American Political Science Review 75, no. 2 (June 1981): 411–25.

Davidson, R. H. and Walter J. Oleszek, Congress and Its Members , 8th ed. (Washington, DC: CQ Press, 2002).

Peabody, R. L., Leadership in Congress (Boston: Little, Brown, 1976).

Peters Jr., R. M., The American Speakership (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1997).

Rae, N. C. and Colton C. Campbell, eds. New Majority or Old Minority? (Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 1999).

Sachs, R. C., “Leadership in the U.S. House of Representatives,” CRS Report for Congress , September 19, 1996, order code 96-784GOV.

American Government and Politics in the Information Age Copyright © 2016 by University of Minnesota is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

Congressional Rules, Leadership, and Committee Selection

Published on January 31, 2023

View the PDF version.

Every two years, at the beginning of each Congress, the House of Representatives is responsible for adopting rules that govern the procedure and process of the chamber, while the Senate uses its traditional rules and procedures. The adoption of these rules is necessary for sessions of Congress to run as smoothly as possible. Standing rules also dictate how party leadership and committee membership are selected. This is a basic guide to rules and procedures in both chambers of Congress.

Rules and Procedures in the House

At the beginning of each Congress, the House of Representatives must vote on a new rules package to determine the rules that will govern the body for the next two years. Before these rules are adopted, the House operates based on general parliamentarian rules. The House usually adopts the rules of the previous Congress and makes amendments the body feels are necessary. The rules package lays out the guidelines for the daily procedure in the House, how the chamber passes legislation, and other rules of decorum.

The House Committee on Rules is among the oldest standing committees and is the mechanism by which the Speaker maintains control of the House Floor. The House Rules Committee has two types of jurisdiction–special orders and original jurisdiction. Special orders, or special rules, determine the rules of debates on a matter or measure on the Floor and are the bulk of the Committee’s work. Original jurisdiction refers to changes being made to the standing rules. The Rules Committee can create or change almost any rule as long as a majority of the House agrees.\

Reporting a special rule to the House Committee on Rules is a process that begins with the committee of jurisdiction requesting a hearing by the Rules Committee. The Rules Committee then holds a hearing in which Members of Congress from the committee of jurisdiction can make their case.

Rules and Procedures in the Senate

Unlike the House of Representatives, the Senate, as a continuing body, does not have to adopt or readopt its rules with each new Congress. A set of standing rules govern proceedings in the Senate in conjunction with a body of precedents created by rulings of presiding officers or by votes of the Senate, a variety of established and customary practices, and ad hoc arrangements the Senate makes. The standing rules guarantee rights to senators, however, these rights are sometimes foregone by senators in the interest of conducting business more quickly.

One rule that separates the Senate from the House is the use of cloture to end a filibuster. Senators can prolong voting on bills by debating at length or using other delaying tactics, but a cloture vote by 60 out of the 100 senators can end the debate and force a vote on the bill.

The Senate Committee on Rules and Administration is responsible for upholding the rules of the Senate floor, the administration of Senate buildings, the credentials and qualifications of senators, and the development and implementation of strategic plans to improve the operations of the Senate. The committee has jurisdiction over any matters relating to the rules and procedures of the Senate rules and regulations. Unlike its counterpart in the House, the Senate Rules and Administration Committee does not need to develop a rules package for each new Congress.

Selection of House and Senate Leadership

Leadership in the House is decided by internal party elections. These elections typically take place behind closed doors via secret ballot in November following the general election. Leadership elections also determine the chairs of the Democratic Caucus and the Republican Conference and the chairs of the two parties’ campaign committees. The parties also elect their nominees for Speaker of the House. The Speaker is elected by a simple majority in a vote put to the entire House of Representatives.

The Speaker is the most powerful member of leadership, followed by the majority leader, minority leader, majority and minority whips, and finally the assistant speaker

In the Senate, leadership consists of the president pro tempore, the majority and minority leaders, conference chairs, policy committee chairs, conference secretaries, and campaign committee chairs. These positions are elected or appointed by their separate parties.

The vice president of the United States serves as the president of the Senate, but the president pro tempore presides over the Senate in the absence of the vice president. The president pro tempore is traditionally, but not always, the most senior member of the majority party in the Senate who is elected to the role by the chamber. Responsibilities of the president pro tempore include appointing the director of the Congressional Budget Office with the Speaker of the House, making appointments to various national commissions and advisory boards, and receiving reports from certain government agencies.

The Democratic leader in the Senate serves as chair of the party conference, but the Senate Republicans divide those duties, electing one person to serve as conference chair and another to serve as leader.

Selection of Committees in the House and Senate

Both parties in both chambers use steering committees, also known as committees on committees, to determine leadership and membership of committees. The Republican Steering Committee and the Democratic Steering and Policy Committee are selected during meetings in November and December after an election. The steering committees then make recommendations to the Republican Conference and Democratic Caucus respectively on committee chairs, ranking minority members, and general committee assignments.

In the House, once the steering committees make recommendations to their parties, the relevant party caucus approves the recommendations of the selection committee. Then the House approves the recommendations of the caucuses, which are brought before the House as privileged resolutions.

Traditionally, though not exclusively, committee chairs have been selected by seniority, so that the longest-serving Members of the committee from the majority and minority parties become the chair and ranking member, respectively, of the committee. Members of the House are typically limited to service on two committees and four subcommittees, with exceptions for particular committees.

In the Senate, the committee assignment process is guided by Senate rules as well as party rules and practices. The Senate governs committee operations through its Standing Rules XXIV-XXVIII.

Senators are formally elected to standing committees by the entire membership of the Senate, but in practice, each party conference is largely responsible for determining which of its members will sit on each committee. Just as they do in the house, steering committees from both parties make recommendations on committee leadership and assignments. In both party conferences, the floor leader has the authority to make some committee assignments, which can provide the leader with a method of promoting party discipline through the granting or withholding of desired assignments. The number of seats a party holds in the Senate determines its share of seats on each committee.

Senate rules divide committees into three categories based on their importance: Class A, Class B, and Class C. Each senator may serve on no more than two Class A committees and one Class B committee, unless granted special permission. There are no limits to service on Class C committees.

In both chambers, the Republican party has term limits on committee leadership roles.

Links to Other Resources

• Congressional Research Service – ​ Commonly Used Motions and Requests in the House of Representatives
• Congressional Research Service – ​ House and Senate Rules of Procedure: A Comparison
• Congressional Research Service – House Standing Committee Chairs and Ranking Minority Members: Rules Governing Selection Procedures
• CNN – What to know about upcoming House leadership elections
• GovInfo – Congressional Calendars
• Office of the Historian of the United States House of Representatives – House Committees
• Roll Call – ​ House adopts rules package for 118th Congress
• United States Congress – ​Glossary of Legislative Terms
• United States House of Representatives – ​ A Guide to the Rules, Precedents, and Procedures of the House
• United States House of Representatives – ​ The Legislative Process
• Unites States Senate – Rules and Procedure
• United States Senate – ​When a New Congress Begins

Ch. 3 – The Legislative Branch

E. reading: house leadership, learning objectives.

After reading this section, you should be able to answer the following questions:

• What criteria do House members use when selecting their leadership?
• What roles do the Speaker, floor leaders, and whips play in the House?

The House leadership consists of the Speaker, floor leaders , and whips . Committee chairs also are part of the House leadership. The rules of the House give extensive power to leaders to direct the legislative process.

Leadership Criteria

House members consider a number of factors when choosing leaders. A member’s personal reputation, interactions with other members, legislative skills, expertise, experience, length of service, and knowledge of the institution are taken into account. Members tend to choose leaders who are in the ideological mainstream of their party and represent diverse regions of the country. The positions that a member has held in Congress, such as service on important committees, are evaluated. Fundraising ability, media prowess, and communications skills are increasingly important criteria for leadership. The ability to forge winning coalitions and the connections that a member has to leaders in the Senate or the executive branch are factored into the decision. [1]

Holding a congressional leadership position is challenging, especially as most members think of themselves as leaders rather than followers. Revolts can occur when members feel leaders are wielding too much power or promoting personal agendas at the expense of institutional goals. At times, a leader’s style or personality may rub members the wrong way and contribute to their being ousted from office. [2]

Speaker of the House

The Speaker of the House is at the top of the leadership hierarchy. The Speaker is second in succession to the presidency and is the only officer of the House mentioned specifically in the Constitution. The Speaker’s official duties include referring bills to committees, appointing members to select and conference committees, counting and announcing all votes on legislation, and signing all bills passed by the House. He rarely participates in floor debates or votes on bills. The Speaker also is the leader of his or her political party in the House. In this capacity, the Speaker oversees the party’s committee assignments, sets the agenda of activities in the House, and bestows rewards on faithful party members, such as committee leadership positions. [3]

In addition to these formal responsibilities, the Speaker has significant power to control the legislative agenda in the House. The Rules Committee, through which all bills must pass, functions as an arm of the Speaker. The Speaker appoints members of the Rules Committee who can be relied on to do his or her bidding. He or she exercises control over which bills make it to the floor for consideration and the procedures that will be followed during debate. Special rules, such as setting limits on amendments or establishing complex time allocations for debate, can influence the contents of a bill and help or hinder its passage. [4]

Speakers’ personal styles have influenced the evolution of the position. Speaker Joe Cannon (R-IL) became the most powerful Speaker of the House by using strong-arm tactics to control members of both parties. “Czar” Cannon’s style so angered his colleagues that he was forced to step down as chairman of the Rules Committee during the St. Patrick’s Day Revolt of 1910, which stripped him of his ability to control appointments and legislation. The position lost prestige and power until Speaker Sam Rayburn (D-TX) took office in 1940. Rayburn was able to use his popularity and political acumen to reestablish the Speakership as a powerful position. [5]

Strong Speakers of the House, such as Joe Cannon (left) and Sam Rayburn (right), were able to exert influence over other members. Strong speakers are no longer prominent in the House.

A Speaker’s personal style can influence the amount of media coverage the position commands. The Speaker can become the public face of the House by appearing frequently in the press. A charismatic speaker can rival the president in grabbing media attention and setting the nation’s issue agenda. On April 7, 1995, Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-GA) made an unprecedented prime-time television “State of the Congress” address on CBS indicating that the House has passed the Contract With America, a plan that proposed extensive changes to the social welfare system and tax policy. Despite the fact that the Contract with America died in the Senate, Gingrich became a “multimedia Whirling Dervish of books, writings, lectures, tapes, and television, spewing out ideas.” [6] He was a constant presence on the television and radio talk show circuit, which kept attention focused on his party’s issue platform. This strategy worked at the outset, as the Republicans were able to push through some of their proposals. Gingrich’s aggressive personal style and media blitz eventually backfired by alienating members of both parties. This experience illustrates that the media can have a boomerang effect—publicity can make a political leader and just as quickly can bring him down.

In contrast, Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-IL), who took office in 1999, exhibited an accommodating leadership style and was considered a “nice guy” by most members. He worked behind the scenes to build coalitions and achieve his policy initiatives. After the election of President George W. Bush, Hastert coordinated a communications strategy with the executive branch to promote a Republican policy agenda. He shared the media spotlight, which other members appreciated. His cooperative approach was effective in getting important budget legislation passed. [7]

Republican John Boehner of Ohio became Speaker of the House after the Republicans took control following the 2010 elections. He replaced Democrat Nancy Pelosi, the first woman Speaker.

Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) was the first woman Speaker of the House, serving from 2006 to 2010. Media coverage of Pelosi frequently included references to her gender, clothing, emotions, and personal style. Pelosi’s choice of Armani suits was much noted in the press following her selection. Syndicated New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd wrote a piece on November 6, 2006, titled “Squeaker of the House.” Dowd alleged that Pelosi’s first act after becoming Speaker was to “throw like a girl” and that she was “making her first move based on relationships and past slights rather than strategy.” “Squeaker of the House” became a moniker that stuck with Pelosi throughout her tenure as Speaker and was the subject of a YouTube parody. Pelosi was replaced by Rep. John Boehner (R-OH) when the Republicans took control of the House following the 2010 midterm elections.

Floor Leaders

The Republicans and Democrats elect floor leaders who coordinate legislative initiatives and serve as the chief spokespersons for their parties on the House floor. These positions are held by experienced legislators who have earned the respect of their colleagues. Floor leaders actively work at attracting media coverage to promote their party’s agenda. The leadership offices all have their own press secretaries.

The House majority leader is second to the Speaker in the majority party hierarchy. Working with the Speaker, he is responsible for setting the annual legislative agenda, scheduling legislation for consideration, and coordinating committee activity. He operates behind the scenes to ensure that the party gets the votes it needs to pass legislation. He consults with members and urges them to support the majority party and works with congressional leaders and the president, when the two are of the same party, to build coalitions. The majority leader monitors the floor carefully when bills are debated to keep his party members abreast of any key developments. [8]

Rep. Eric Cantor (R-VA) became House Majority Leader following the 2010 midterm elections. Cantor’s web page features multiple means of reaching out to citizens, including links to Facebook and a TwitterBuzz feed.

Link: House Majority Leader

See Eric Cantor’s web page .

The House minority leader is the party with the fewest members’ nominee for Speaker. She is the head of her party in the House and receives significant media coverage. She articulates the minority party’s policies and rallies members to court the media and publicly take on the policies of the majority party. She devises tactics that will place the minority party in the best position for influencing legislation by developing alternatives to legislative proposals supported by the majority. During periods of divided government, when the president is a member of the minority party, the minority leader serves as the president’s chief spokesperson in the House. [9]

Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) became House Minority Leader after she was replaced as Speaker of the House by Republican Rep. John Boehner (R-OH) following the 2010 midterm elections. Pelosi’s website does not mention her status as minority leader.

Members of Congress from the Republican and Democratic parties elect whips who are responsible for encouraging party loyalty and discipline in the House. Aided by extensive networks of deputies and assistants, whips make sure that the lines of communication between leaders and members remain open. In 2002, whip Steny Hoyer (D-MD) greatly expanded his organization to include forty senior whips and thirty assistant whips to enforce a “strategy of inclusion,” which gives more members the opportunity to work closely with party leaders and become vested in party decisions. This strategy made more party leaders with expertise available to the press in the hopes of increasing coverage of the Democratic Party’s positions. Whips keep track of members’ voting intentions on key bills and try persuade wayward members to toe the party line. [10]

Key Takeaways

An extensive leadership structure provides an organizational framework that helps House members work effectively if not efficiently. At the top of the leadership hierarchy is the Speaker of the House, who is the body’s presiding officer. Majority and minority leaders help set their party’s agenda on issues. The whips encourage party unity on House votes.

• Robert L. Peabody, Leadership in Congress (Boston: Little, Brown, 1976). ↵
• Joseph Cooper and David W. Brady, “Institutional Context and Leadership Style: The House from Cannon to Rayburn,” American Political Science Review 75, no. 2 (June 1981): 411–25. ↵
• Thomas P. Carr, “Party Leaders in the House: Election, Duties, and Responsibilities,” CRS Report for Congress , October 5, 2001, order code RS20881. ↵
• Nicol C. Rae and Colton C. Campbell, eds. New Majority or Old Minority? (Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 1999). ↵
• Ronald M. Peters, Jr., The American Speakership (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1997). ↵
• Dan Balz and Ronald Brownstein, Storming the Gates (Boston: Little Brown, 1996), 143. ↵
• Roger H. Davidson and Walter J. Oleszek, Congress and Its Members , 8th ed. (Washington, DC: CQ Press, 2002). ↵
• Richard C. Sachs, “Leadership in the U.S. House of Representatives,” CRS Report for Congress , September 19, 1996, order code 96-784GOV. ↵
• 21st Century American Government. Authored by : Anonymous. Provided by : Lardbucket. Located at : http://2012books.lardbucket.org/books/21st-century-american-government-and-politics/s16-04-house-leadership.html . License : CC BY-NC-SA: Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike
• Leader Boehner (R-OH) and Greg Walden (R-OR). Authored by : House GOP Leader. Located at : https://www.flickr.com/photos/gopleader/4331119670/ . License : CC BY: Attribution
• Joseph G. Cannon photo. Provided by : U.S. Library of Congress. Located at : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:JGCannon.jpg . License : Public Domain: No Known Copyright
• Sam Rayburn photo. Provided by : U.S. Library of Congress. Located at : https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Sam_Rayburn3.jpg . License : Public Domain: No Known Copyright
• Official portrait of Congressman Eric Cantor. Provided by : United States Congress. Located at : https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Eric_Cantor,_official_portrait,_112th_Congress.jpg . License : Public Domain: No Known Copyright
• Photo of Nancy Pelosi. Authored by : Unknown. Located at : https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Nancy_Pelosi_0009_3.jpg . License : Public Domain: No Known Copyright

• New Hampshire
• North Carolina
• Pennsylvania
• West Virginia
• Online hoaxes
• Coronavirus
• Health Care
• Immigration
• Environment
• Foreign Policy
• Kamala Harris
• Donald Trump
• Mitch McConnell
• Hakeem Jeffries
• Ron DeSantis
• Tucker Carlson
• Sean Hannity
• Rachel Maddow
• PolitiFact Videos
• 2024 Elections
• Mostly True
• Mostly False
• Pants on Fire
• Biden Promise Tracker
• Trump-O-Meter
• Latest Promises
• Our Process
• Who pays for PolitiFact?
• Advertise with Us
• Suggest a Fact-check
• Corrections and Updates
• Newsletters

Get PolitiFact in your inbox.

• Weekly Email Newsletter
• Daily Email Newsletter

How a House speaker could kick some lawmakers off committees

House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., joined by Republican Conference Chair Elise Stefanik, R-N.Y., talks to reporters Dec. 14, 2022, on Capitol Hill in Washington. (AP)

Rep. Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., wants to be House speaker. If he gets the House’s top post — which is not a certainty given dissent within his caucus — he wants to remove some Democrats from high-profile committees.

In January 2022 , McCarthy named three Democratic members he would unseat: Reps. Adam Schiff and Eric Swalwell of California, both of whom serve on the Intelligence Committee, and Rep. Ilhan Omar of Minnesota, who serves on the Foreign Affairs Committee.

McCarthy has pointed to Schiff’s references to the " Steele dossier " and its unverified allegations about former President Donald Trump and Russia; Swalwell’s connections to a Chinese spy, with whom he cut ties after federal investigators informed him of the espionage link; and Omar’s past statements that have been criticized as antisemitic.

Removing any or all of these Democratic lawmakers from committees would echo the Democratic-led votes in 2021 to unseat two Republicans who had shared inflammatory social media posts: Majorie Taylor Greene of Georgia and Paul Gosar of Arizona.

"The Democrats have created a new thing where they’re picking and choosing who could be on committee," McCarthy told Breitbart News in January 2022.

Another irritant for McCarthy was the decision by Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., to reject some of his nominees to join the committee charged with probing the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol attack. Pelosi rejected McCarthy’s decision to name GOP Reps. Jim Jordan of Ohio and Jim Banks of Indiana to the committee, saying their loyalty to Trump would weaken "the integrity of the investigation." 

This was the first time in House history that a speaker vetoed a minority leader’s recommendations for members to serve on any such committee, said Donald Wolfensberger, a congressional scholar at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars and a former staff director of the House Rules Committee.

How plausible is it that McCarthy, if elected speaker, could torpedo would-be Democratic committee assignments, and how would he go about the task? We took a closer look.

Former Rep. Jim Traficant in Boardman, Ohio, in 2010. (AP)

Historically, ousting committee members has been rare , although the pace has accelerated in recent years. Between 1905 and 2001, no House member was kicked off a committee, according to The Associated Press .

The most common reason for a committee expulsion is a criminal allegation.

In 2001, Democrats pulled the committee assignments for one of their own, Ohio Rep. Jim Traficant. Officially, the transgression that led to Traficant’s expulsion from committees was crossing party lines to vote for a Republican speaker. However, Traficant’s vote for speaker followed a long series of legal troubles and controversial actions. Traficant was eventually convicted of 10 corruption-related charges; that precipitated his expulsion from the House.

Another lawmaker who faced corruption charges, Rep. William Jefferson, D-La., was kicked off the influential House Ways and Means Committee in 2006. He was later convicted on 11 corruption-related charges.

In 2018, Republicans removed Reps. Chris Collins, R-N.Y., and Duncan Hunter, R-Calif., from their committee positions after they were indicted. Both were convicted, and were later pardoned by then-President Donald Trump after they had left the House.

Sometimes, a party has pulled its own members from plum committee assignments while allowing them to remain on lower-profile committees. This occurred in 2012 with several Republican members who had shown what party leaders considered disloyalty, including Reps. David Schweikert of Arizona, Walter Jones of North Carolina, Justin Amash of Michigan and Tim Huelskamp of Kansas.

And in 2019, GOP leaders, including McCarthy, pulled Rep. Steve King, R-Iowa, from his committee assignments after he made racist comments . 

The expulsions of Greene and Gosar in 2021 — which involved controversial statements but not criminal allegations — were handled differently. Critics pushed Republican leaders, including McCarthy, to punish the lawmakers, as they had done with King. But he refused, so Democrats turned to a different mechanism: Democrats brought resolutions to the floor that called for pulling the lawmakers from committee assignments.

As a result , Greene lost her slots on the Budget and Education and Labor committees .

In another vote , Gosar lost his positions on the Oversight and Reform and Natural Resources committees. 

Different lawmakers may have different priorities. Some want to create legislation; some focus more on constituent service; others see the House as a way to raise money and raise their profile.

Committees are most important for lawmakers who want to legislate. 

"Committee members have more influence over policymaking within their jurisdictions than do other members, have more influence over hearings and investigations, and benefit from the attention and campaign contributions that come with their policy influence and visibility," said said Steven Smith, a political scientist at Washington University in St. Louis. "For a member of the House, who is normally struggling to get some visibility nationally and at home, committee membership is important, even in the heavily party-oriented policy making of today’s House."

California Democratic Reps. Adam Schiff and Eric Swalwell, speak with reporters on Capitol Hill in 2019. (AP)

Democrats do have the option not to offer Schiff, Swalwell and Omar for the minority-party slots in those committees. But there’s little indication the Democrats plan to do that. So, the ball would be in the new speaker’s court.

Of the three Democrats, the two who serve on the Intelligence Committee, Schiff and Swalwell, are on the thinnest ice for keeping their assignments. That’s because the Intelligence Committee is a select committee rather than a standing committee — and the speaker has much more robust powers to choose the membership of select committees. 

Wolfensberger describes the speaker’s right to block Intelligence Committee members as "unchallengeable."

By contrast, removing Omar from the Foreign Affairs Committee, which is a standing committee, would require additional steps. The House votes that removed Greene and Gosar show it’s still possible. 

One option would be for McCarthy, if he is the speaker, to block a resolution that approves all committee memberships at the start of a new Congress. Each party submits its own resolution for its own members, and usually, these resolutions are pro forma and approved by voice vote, which is a process reserved for uncontroversial topics, Wolfensberger said. 

But if Democrats nominate members McCarthy disapproves of, such as Omar, he could tell Democrats he’ll block their resolution until they remove the members from those committee assignments. Because Republicans will have the majority, they would have a good chance of winning this vote, seating Republican members but not Democrats. 

Under an old House precedent that emerged under different circumstances, the House could organize its committees and proceed with business as long as committees had a majority quorum, even without any minority members.

The risk for the Republicans in this scenario is potentially creating a spectacle. They could appear to be freezing out the Democrats from participating in any committees, which could make them look petty to the public when they want to make a good impression with their new majority.

A somewhat less risky option for McCarthy would be to let the initial committee resolution pass, allowing Omar or others to be seated, then use the mechanism Pelosi used for Greene and Gosar — a vote by the full House to remove the targeted lawmakers from a committee.

The Republicans would likely win this vote, as the Democrats did with Greene and Gosar, but it’s not a certainty. The GOP majority going into the new Congress will be as narrow as the Democrats’ was for the past two years, and they would have to guard against too many Republicans defecting on the vote.

So far, one Republican has publicly expressed opposition to seating specific Democrats: Nancy Mace of South Carolina. 

A downside of a tit-for-tat approach to committee seatings, Wolfensberger wrote recently , "is the reality that Coretta Scott King warmed of when she said, ‘Revenge and retaliation always perpetuate the cycle of anger, fear and violence.’ That cycle needs to be broken in the House, and soon."

Our Sources

CNN, " McCarthy vows to remove Democrats from committees if Republicans win House ," Jan. 10, 2022

Breitbart, tweet , Jan. 10, 2022

Politico, " Nancy Mace said she won’t vote to remove Democrats from committees next year — a step Kevin McCarthy has vowed to take if he becomes speaker ," Dec. 13, 2022

Politico, " McCarthy’s ongoing speaker battle paralyzes House ," Dec. 15, 2022

CNN, " House votes to censure and remove Gosar from committees over violent video targeting AOC and Biden ," Nov. 17, 2021

NPR, " House Removes Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene From Her Committee Assignments ," Feb. 4, 2021

CNN, " House votes to remove Marjorie Taylor Greene from committee assignments ," Feb. 4, 2021

CNN, " Marjorie Taylor Greene indicated support for executing prominent Democrats in 2018 and 2019 before running for Congress ," Jan. 26, 2021

CNN, " Republican congressman posts video depicting violence against Ocasio-Cortez and Biden ," Nov. 10, 2021

Washington Post, " A brief guide to Steve King’s statements on race ," Jan. 14, 2019

Washington Post, " Marjorie Taylor Greene would be in rare company if she is kicked off her committees ," Feb. 3, 2021

Washington Post, " Rep. Omar apologizes after House Democratic leadership condemns her comments as ‘anti-Semitic tropes ,’" Feb. 11, 2019

Axios, " Exclusive: Suspected Chinese spy targeted California politicians ," Dec. 8, 2020 

Axios, " The media’s epic fail ," Nov. 14, 2021 

Axios, " McCarthy plans to oust Schiff, Swalwell and Omar from panels ," Jan. 10, 2022

Associated Press, " Pelosi bars Trump allies from Jan. 6 probe; GOP vows boycott ," July 21, 2021

Don Wolfensberger, " Speaker’s committee removal powers are limited ," Nov. 28, 2022

Email interview with Donald Wolfensberger, congressional scholar at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars and a former staff director of the House Rules Committee, Dec. 15, 2022

Email interview with Steven Smith, political scientist at Washington University in St. Louis, Dec. 14, 2022

Browse the Truth-O-Meter

More by louis jacobson.

Removing House members from standing committees

• by Daniel Schuman
• August 15, 2018
• Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share via Email

(Editor’s note: This article originally appeared in Legislative Procedure on August 14, 2018.)

Representative Chris Collins, R-N.Y., was recently arrested  for insider trading. Immediately after his arrest, Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wis., released a statement saying, in passive voice, “Until this matter is settled, Rep. Collins will not be serving on the House Energy and Commerce Committee.” This was reported by multiple news outlets as Ryan stripping Collins of his committee membership. But technically, that’s not possible.

According to the Congressional Research Service , the Speaker can remove members of select committees and conference committees at any time. And internal party rules require an indicted chairman, ranking member, or member of leadership to temporarily step aside. For example, Speaker Ryan could remove Representative Devin Nunes, R-Calif., from the House Intelligence committee (HPSCI) at any time for any reason — HPSCI is a select committee.

But Energy and Commerce is a standing committee. That means that Ryan didn’t remove Collins per se. Rather, Collins submitted a letter of resignation – described as a “temporary removal” - which was unanimously agreed to by the House in a pro forma session Friday morning (as shown in this brief C-Span clip ). How much arm twisting happened behind the scenes will be left as an exercise to the reader. (CRS says it’s an open question whether an indicted-but-not-convicted member could be required to suspend participation in a committee.)

Members might step down under other circumstances, but it always requires more than a statement by the Speaker. For example, Representative John Conyers, D-Mich., sent a letter  to Democratic leadership stepping down as ranking member of the Judiciary committee; Representative Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif.,  described  it as Conyers agreeing to step down. (There’s no doubt he was under enormous political pressure to do so.)

SPEAKER’S PERCEIVED POWER

Removal of committee members is a significant point of contention concerning the Speaker’s perceived power. Five years ago, then-Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio,  stripped  four Republicans of key committee assignments because they disagreed with him on policy grounds and voted against leadership positions. Reaction to Boehner’s move eventually spiraled into a rebellion several years later aimed at forcing him out. Yet Boehner didn’t act on his own authority to remove the members. Instead, he removed them via the party steering committee nomination process, which declined at the start of the 113th Congress to re-nominate them to the committees on which they previously served.

Incidentally, Collins said  on Saturday that he would suspend his campaign for reelection. (perhaps it’s too late to remove his name from the ballot?) Regardless, his move limits some of the leverage congressional leadership might have over him. The next congressional action he has to look forward to is activity by the House Ethics Committee, which, in the next 30 days, must either vote to start an inquiry into Collins or report to the House why it has not done so, in accordance with committee rule 18(e)(2) . According to some news reports, Ryan reported Collins to the Ethics committee. But again, that could be a misreading of the aforementioned statement by Ryan.

Daniel Schuman

More by daniel schuman + see all, how house committees get their money, remembering senator john mccain, collins indictment could spur reform, house rules should be available to public before vote, related content, new report: house committees are hearing from fewer witnesses and that hurts public policy., house select committee on the modernization of congress achieves progress on recommendations, the house votes to create a select committee to investigate january 6, today: select committee to hold hearing on improving staff capacity, get legbranch updates in your inbox..

Keep current on essential updates on Congress.

User Clip: House Speaker McCarthy Has Heated Exchange On Intel Committee Assignments

"You don't get to determine when I answer a question, in all due respect," said House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) during a heated exchange… read more

"You don't get to determine when I answer a question, in all due respect," said House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) during a heated exchange with a reporter on House Intelligence Committee assignments. Speaker McCarthy continued to elaborate on why he will not place Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) and Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-CA) on the committee, citing an abuse of power by Rep. Schiff and connections to a Chinese spy by Rep. Swalwell. He continued to say that this has nothing to do with Rep. George Santos (R-NY). close

Javascript must be enabled in order to access C-SPAN videos.

• Text type Text
• Filter by Speaker All Speakers Kevin McCarthy
• Search this text

*This text was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.

People in this video

• Kevin McCarthy U.S. Representative [R] California

Hosting Organization

• U.S. Capitol | Office of the Speaker of the House U.S. Capitol | Office of the Speaker of the House

MyC-SPAN users can download four Congressional hearings and proceedings under four hours for free each month.

User Created Clips from This Video

Speaker McCarthy in Heated Exchange on Intel Committee Assignments

• 107,650 views

User Clip: McCarthy Press Conference

User Clip: Kevin McCarthy draws a distinction between Pence and Biden documents

User Clip: McCarthy on Santos

• Find Your Representative
• 118th Congress, 2nd Session

Roll Call 188 | Bill Number: H. Res. 1209

Vote Question: On Motion to Table

Declaring the office of Speaker of the House of Representatives to be vacant

Vote Type: Yea-And-Nay

Status: Passed

not voting: 21

Remote Voting by Proxy

Votes by party

McCarthy expected to keep 3 Democrats off House committees

His targets are Reps. Ilhan Omar, Adam Schiff and Eric Swalwell.

Speaker Kevin McCarthy and leading Republicans are expected to soon make good on a vow to keep three Democrats from seats on influential committees in the new House.

McCarthy's focus is Minnesota Rep. Ilhan Omar, who has served on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, as well as Reps. Adam Schiff and Eric Swalwell, two California lawmakers who have served on the House Intelligence Committee.

"Speaker McCarthy confirms that Adam Schiff, Eric Swalwell, and Ilhan Omar are getting kicked off the Intel and Foreign Affairs Committees. Promises made. Promises kept!" Rep. Troy Nehls, a member of the conservative House Freedom Caucus, tweeted on Tuesday.

McCarthy has long pledged to oust the three, citing objections to their behavior and the precedent of the previous House removing committee assignments for Republican Reps. Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia and Paul Gosar of Arizona .

In those cases, the Democratic majority and some Republicans in the House voted to remove Greene and Gosar over their inflammatory conduct, including Greene spreading conspiracy theories -- some of which she has since renounced -- and Gosar sharing an animated social media video depicting violence against President Joe Biden and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. (Gosar said amid the controversy, "I do not espouse violence.")

The two far-right Republicans were also denounced last year for attending a white nationalist rally in Florida. McCarthy, who was fresh off a trip to Israel, responded at the time that "there’s no place in our party for any of this. ... The party should not be associated any time, any place with somebody who is antisemitic.”

But sources have since said that Greene, despite her past controversies, will likely have a seat on the House Oversight Committee in the new Congress.

House Majority Leader Steve Scalise was asked during a press conference on Tuesday what the process would be for stripping Democratic members of their assignments and said no one had yet been assigned to committees. But he suggested removals were a new standard first set by Democrats.

"As we see what comes out, the Democrats set a precedent that we urged them strongly not to go down last Congress," Scalise said.

"They decided that they were going to break the precedent that had been in place for over 200 years and remove members of the opposing party that our party selected to be on committees," he continued. "And so that was a practice they set and so, obviously, we're going to be looking very closely at who they appoint. They haven't appointed anybody yet to committees, but we're gonna see if they do."

After Republicans won back the House in November, McCarthy reiterated to Fox News that he planned to keep the three Democrats from their committee posts.

Rep. Pete Aguilar, the chair of the House Democratic caucus, on Tuesday declined to elaborate on next steps should Schiff and Swalwell be blocked or booted by Republicans from the intelligence panel.

"We will send the names of the individuals who this caucus supports and are qualified to serve on committees," Aguilar told reporters. "What the speaker does beyond that is something that we will handle ... but it isn't anything we're going to get in today."

Schiff previously discussed the potential removal of his committee assignment during a November interview with ABC "This Week" co-anchor Jonathan Karl.

"I suspect he will do whatever Marjorie Taylor Greene wants him to do," Schiff said of McCarthy. "He is a very weak leader of his conference, meaning that he will adhere to the wishes of the lowest common denominator. And if that lowest common denominator wants to remove people from committees, that's what they'll do."

McCarthy has accused Schiff of lying to the public during references to a disputed dossier that claimed to outline links between former President Donald Trump's 2016 campaign and Russia.

McCarthy has also called Swalwell a "national security threat" for Swalwell's reported run-ins with an alleged Chinese spy, stating there's no way he should be allowed to serve on the committee.

MORE: Schiff contends Republican House majority will 'be chaos' with a 'very weak leader'

Swalwell has not been accused of wrongdoing and he has said he stopped contact with the woman after federal authorities briefed him, according to the Associated Press .

Schiff served as the lead impeachment manager in Trump's first Senate trial, and both he and Swalwell were managers for Trump's second impeachment trial.

McCarthy, as speaker, has the power to keep Schiff and Swalwell off the intelligence panel, but for any other committee -- like Omar on foreign affairs -- the full House would need to vote by simple majority to block her.

Separately, McCarthy's criticized Omar over what he described as her "repeated antisemitic and anti-American remarks." Omar has previously apologized for some of her statements, including about lobbyists on behalf of Israel's government.

Omar has also fired back at McCarthy, accusing him of amplifying rhetoric targeting minorities.

"McCarthy's effort to repeatedly single me out for scorn and hatred -- including threatening to strip me from my committee -- does nothing to address the issues our constituents deal with. It does nothing to address inflation, healthcare, or solve the climate crisis," she said in a statement in November.

"What it does is gin up fear and hate against Somali-Americans and anyone who shares my identity, and further divide us along racial and ethnic lines," she said.

Related Topics

Top stories.

Actor Steve Buscemi punched in the face in New York City

• May 12, 5:40 PM

Woman uses self-checkout to steal $60,000 of items from same Target store over a year

• May 10, 5:03 AM

What led to DNA match, arrest of minister two decades after murders of 2 teens

• May 10, 6:03 AM

Smoke from Canadian wildfires reaches US, Minnesota under air quality alert

• May 12, 7:59 PM

At least 11 dead, mostly students, in Indonesia bus crash after brakes apparently failed, police say

• May 12, 12:50 AM

ABC News Live

24/7 coverage of breaking news and live events

House Committees: Assignment Process

House votes overwhelmingly to save Speaker Mike Johnson from Marjorie Taylor Greene's push to oust him

WASHINGTON — House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., and his allies beat back a dramatic effort by far-right Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene to oust him from power Wednesday, ending — for now — months of threats against his speakership.

The vote to "table" or kill Greene's motion to vacate the speaker's chair was 359-43. Just 10 Republicans voted with Greene, R-Ga.; seven Democrats voted present.

There were 196 Republicans and 163 Democrats who voted to kill Greene's motion; along with the 11 Republicans, 32 Democrats voted to move forward with her motion.

"I appreciate the show of confidence from my colleagues to defeat this misguided effort," Johnson said in Statuary Hall, just off the House floor, after the vote. "Hopefully, this is the end of the personality politics and the frivolous character assassination that has defined the 118th Congress. It’s regrettable. It’s not who we are as Americans, and we’re better than this. We need to get beyond it."

Greene, who had threatened for weeks to force the issue, dragged her feet as it became clear she didn't have enough support to remove Johnson. Unlike in last year's successful vote to remove former Speaker Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., many Democrats had made it clear they would vote to save Johnson , especially after he helped  stave off a government shutdown , pushed through the  renewal of a critical intelligence surveillance spy tool  and  passed billions of dollars in foreign aid  for Ukraine after months of delays.

During the last vote series of the week, Greene stood on the floor and announced she was filing a privileged motion to vacate the speaker's chair. Colleagues promptly booed her.

"This is the 'uniparty' for the American people watching," she said in response to the boos, pointing with both hands at Republicans and Democrats in the chamber.

Johnson's mentor and top ally, Majority Leader Steve Scalise, R-La., moved immediately to "table," or "kill,” Greene's motion. Johnson's GOP allies were in a strong position to beat back her efforts given that Democratic leaders said on April 30 that their rank-and-file members would help dismiss her motion .

“Amid this circus, House Democrats have been the adults in the room,” said Rep. Abigail Spanberger, D-Va., a moderate who is running for governor. “We have too much work to do to waste time on petty political games.”That saves Johnson’s job at least temporarily, though the fact that Democrats voted to keep him in power is sure to infuriate conservative activists and outside groups. And nothing would prevent Greene or any other conservative foe from forcing another vote on his fate down the road.

The 10 Republicans who voted with Greene against tabling the motion were Warren Davidson of Ohio, Alex Mooney of West Virginia, Barry Moore of Alabama, Victoria Spartz of Indiana, Chip Roy of Texas, Eric Burlison of Missouri and Paul Gosar, Eli Crane and Andy Biggs, all of Arizona.

However, it isn’t clear all of them would have voted on a resolution to oust Johnson had the motion to table failed; Roy said he was undecided.

While Greene was passionate about toppling Johnson, her campaign never really gained momentum among her colleagues. Conservatives Massie and Gosar were the only co-sponsors of her resolution. And under normal circumstances, those three GOP votes would have been enough to depose Johnson given the GOP’s razor-thin majority if all Democrats voted to remove him.

But members of both parties are still smarting from the paralysis that took over the House for three weeks last fall after Johnson’s predecessor, McCarthy, became the  first speaker to be ousted  in the middle of a congressional term. Greene, a staunch McCarthy ally, vehemently opposed ousting him and ultimately voted no.

The idea of Democrats’ stepping in to save Johnson began bubbling up over the past several months, with members publicly and privately saying they would vote against Greene's effort in favor of governing.

In her resolution, and on the floor, Greene quoted Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., who said in a recent CBS “60 Minutes” interview: “Even though we’re in the minority, we effectively have been governing as if we were in the majority, because we continue to provide a majority of the votes necessary to get things done. Those are just the facts.”

Democrats cheered as she quoted their leader.

“Speaker Johnson’s tenure is defined by one self-serving characteristic," Greene said on the floor before the vote. "When given a choice between advancing Republican priorities or allied with the Democrats to preserve his own personal power, Johnson regularly chooses to ally himself with Democrats."

Although he signed on to Greene’s motion to vacate, Massie repeatedly said he didn’t want to force a vote to oust Johnson and cause similar chaos and instead pressed him to resign voluntarily.

Lawmakers, including many conservatives, have said they  don’t want a repeat  of the fall speaker fight. In an interview last weekend, Republican National Committee Chair Michael Whatley urged party unity when he was asked about Greene’s threat to force a vote to oust Johnson, arguing that the GOP wouldn’t be able to flip the Senate and expand its House majority if the party is divided.

“We need to make sure that all of the Republicans understand the gravity of this election cycle, and they do, and we need to make sure that we are on the same page as we’re moving forward,” Whatley said days before the vote.

Johnson allies lashed out at Greene as she filed her motion. Rep. Dusty Johnson, R-S.D., chair of the Republican Main Street Caucus and no relation to the speaker, ran to cameras on the steps of the Capitol to bash her.

“We know that this motion is not going to do one thing to make America stronger. It’s not going to do one thing to deliver a conservative victory,” he said. “She is engaged in a failing act of political theater. ... We’re going to do what adults do; we’re going to ignore the tantrums and instead work to actually govern this country.”

Asked whether Greene should be punished for her actions, moderate Rep. Marc Molinaro, R-N.Y., said, "There should be accountability for those who continue to make this about themselves."

"Lies and dishonesty are a hell of a lot louder than truth and earnestness," he said. "I will leave to you to figure out which side of that equation she is on."

After the House voted to table, former President Donald Trump wrote on his social media platform that “I absolutely love Marjorie Taylor Greene” but said he prefers to see party unity, adding that “it is my request” that Republicans vote to table her motion.

In the end, Trump had no impact on the vote — it was already finished by the time he published his post.

While some Republicans called for retribution against Greene, including stripping her of committee assignments, Johnson sought out the colleague who tried to topple him. He was spotted at the end of Wednesday's vote series hurrying down the center aisle to catch up with Greene and Massie.

Johnson wrapped his arm around Massie and chatted with Greene for several minutes in the back of the chamber.

“I just talked with them about what they did and why and ... told them that was disappointing and regretful, but we move forward,” Johnson said.

Scott Wong is a senior congressional reporter for NBC News.

Rebecca is a producer and off-air reporter covering Congress for NBC News, managing coverage of the House.

Sahil Kapur is a senior national political reporter for NBC News.

Kyle Stewart is a field producer covering Congress for NBC News.

• Share full article

Advertisement

Supported by

News Analysis

Fresh Off Defeat in Speaker Fight, Greene Relishes the Chaos She Wrought

The hard-right congresswoman from Georgia failed spectacularly in her bid to depose Speaker Mike Johnson. But for a figure who sees her power in creating chaos, the loss was the point.

By Annie Karni

Reporting from the Capitol

As Republicans and Democrats booed her loudly Wednesday when she called a snap vote on the House floor to oust Speaker Mike Johnson, Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene, Republican of Georgia, paused briefly to narrate the drama to viewers back home.

“This is the uniparty, for the American people watching,” Ms. Greene sneered, peering over her glasses at her colleagues like a disappointed schoolteacher.

Ms. Greene went on to take her shot at Mr. Johnson and miss, an outcome that she knew was a certainty. The vote to kill her attempt to remove him was an overwhelming 359 to 43 — with all but 39 Democrats joining Republicans to block her and rescue the G.O.P. speaker.

The move buoyed Mr. Johnson, confirming his status as the leader of an unlikely bipartisan governing coalition in the House that Ms. Greene considers the ultimate enemy. And it isolated Ms. Greene on Capitol Hill, putting her back where she was when she arrived in Washington three years ago: a provocateur and subject of derision who appears to revel in causing huge headaches for her colleagues .

“Hopefully, this is the end of the personality politics and the frivolous character assassination that has defined the 118th Congress,” Mr. Johnson said after the vote.

The word “hopefully” was doing a lot of work.

If Ms. Greene’s goals in Congress were to chair a powerful committee or to build up political capital to drive major policy initiatives — or if she had to worry about drawing a political challenger — this all would constitute a major problem for her. But those have never been the incentives that have driven the gentle lady from Georgia, whose congressional career has been defined by delighting her base and stoking anger on the right more than legislative achievement or political pragmatism.

Ms. Greene hails from a blood-red district where 68 percent of voters supported former President Donald J. Trump in 2020, allowing her to operate with relative impunity in Congress, without fear of a challenge from the right or left. She has further insulated herself politically by donating vast sums to electing Republicans to the House, quietly backing her colleagues even as she picks fights many of them would rather avoid.

So even as it became clear over the last week that she would fail in her quest to depose the speaker, Ms. Greene saw an upside in insisting on the exercise. A vote would offer concrete proof that Mr. Johnson had made himself beholden to the Democrats — a dynamic that has been clear for months as he has partnered with them to pass a host of major bills , including one to send aid to Ukraine — and that many Republicans were going along with what she regarded as a betrayal of the party’s principles.

“I’m thrilled with the whole thing,” Ms. Greene said in an interview on Thursday, sounding upbeat after her spectacular defeat. “Even the booing from both sides — I fully expected it.”

Even if Ms. Greene felt defeated or isolated, she would be exceedingly unlikely to acknowledge it. Her power derives in large part from her irrepressible attitude and her Trumpian instinct to double down rather than retreat in the face of failure.

On Wednesday evening, center-leaning Republicans tried to create as much distance from her as they could, fearful that association with her theatrics would alienate voters in their districts turned off by the seemingly endless chaos in the House.

“All she wants is attention,” said Representative Carlos Gimenez, Republican of Florida. “Today, we shut her down. Our entire conference said, ‘Enough is enough — we don’t need to hear from her anymore.’”

Representative Mike Lawler, Republican of New York, referred repeatedly to Ms. Greene as “Moscow Marjorie” as she dangled her threat to oust the speaker. “Moscow Marjorie has clearly gone off the deep end,” he said on Wednesday.

But if Ms. Greene is now on an island in her party, she hasn’t been there long, and there’s likely a rescue boat en route to bring her back to the mainland. Shortly after arriving in Congress in 2021, she was stripped of her committee assignments by Democrats — 11 Republicans voted with them — and was treated like a pariah by many in Washington. But over the past two years, Ms. Greene has been elevated by her party’s leaders, valued as a top adviser by former Speaker Kevin McCarthy , leaned on as a helpful fund-raiser by vulnerable Republicans and publicly hailed as a dream teammate by center-leaning lawmakers in her party.

“Marjorie Taylor Greene, she is so kind,” Representative Jen Kiggans, a vulnerable Republican from Virginia, said at an event last year before the ouster attempt. “She has been very nice to me.” Of Ms. Greene and other bomb throwers in her party, she said, “I have nothing bad or, you know, different to say about any of these people. They’re on my team, right? They are my teammates. We all want the same things.”

Mr. Trump, who had privately prodded Ms. Greene to move on rather than pursue her vendetta against the speaker and maneuvered to save Mr. Johnson, made it clear she remains on his good side despite ignoring his advice. He waited until the House had turned back her ouster attempt on Wednesday night to post a message on social media urging Republicans to block it. And before he praised Mr. Johnson, he wrote: “I absolutely love Marjorie Taylor Greene. She’s got Spirit, she’s got Fight, and I believe she’ll be around, and on our side, for a long time to come.”

If that’s what abandonment by her party looks like, who needs an embrace?

“He’s not mad at me at all,” Ms. Greene said Thursday of the former president. “I talked to him plenty. He’s proud of me.”

Democrats, for their part, aren’t willing to let Republicans run away from Ms. Greene, the most famous Republican in the House, so quickly.

Missy Cotter Smasal, a Democrat challenging Ms. Kiggans in coastal Virginia, said that “when voters hear her comments calling Marjorie Taylor Greene a teammate, they are astounded and disgusted.”

Even though Ms. Kiggans voted to kill Ms. Greene’s effort on Wednesday night, Ms. Smasal moved quickly to try to use the mutiny attempt as a cudgel against her G.O.P. opponent.

“Jen Kiggans in office enables the chaos of Marjorie Taylor Greene,” she said on Thursday. A spokeswoman for Ms. Kiggans did not respond to a request for comment.

Justin Chermol, a spokesman for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, said: “When the Republicans lose their majority in November, it will be because the so-called moderates let Marjorie Taylor Greene be their party mascot.”

And Representative Hakeem Jeffries, Democrat of New York and the minority leader, wasted little time in sending out a fund-raising email detailing how Ms. Greene “threatened to throw Congress further into chaos, crisis and confusion.”

Ms. Greene laughed off the idea that her actions would help elect Democrats this fall — the argument that everyone from Mr. Trump to Representative Jim Jordan, Republican of Ohio, had used as they tried to discourage her from moving to oust the speaker.

“Republicans will turn out in droves for Trump,” she said. Using an acronym for “Republican in name only,” she continued, “Then they’re going to move down and see that RINO Republican they’ve elected time and time again — who didn’t impeach Biden, who didn’t do anything on the border — they’re going to see that guy and they’re going to cuss him under their breath and skip his name.”

Ms. Greene said Thursday that she didn’t care much whether she was isolated or not.

“If I’m on an island,” she said, “I’m doing exactly what I came here for.”

“I’m very comfortable ebbing and flowing with my party,” she added. “I can be their biggest cheerleader, supporter, defender, donor. I’ve given something like half a million to the National Republican Campaign Committee. I am a team player.”

Over the past two election cycles, Ms. Greene has sent a total of $725,000 to the party’s campaign arm, according to the nonpartisan campaign finance research group Open Secrets, a vast sum for a rank-and-file member like Ms. Greene.

In 2023, Ms. Greene gave the maximum contribution in more than a dozen vulnerable House Republican races, including to colleagues who represent districts President Biden won in 2020, such as Representatives David Schweikert of Arizona and Mike Garcia of California.

On Thursday morning, Ms. Greene made it clear she wasn’t finished tormenting Mr. Johnson just yet.

“Speaker Johnson is the Uniparty Speaker of the House!” she crowed on social media.

Annie Karni is a congressional correspondent for The Times. She writes features and profiles, with a recent focus on House Republican leadership. More about Annie Karni

A Divided Congress: Latest News and Analysis

Marjorie Taylor Greene: The hard-right congresswoman from Georgia failed spectacularly in her bid to depose Speaker Mike Johnson. But for a figure who sees her power in creating chaos, the loss was the point .

Reauthorize FAA and Improve Air Travel: The Senate passed legislation to reauthorize federal aviation programs and put in place new safety measures and consumer protections, at a moment of intense uncertainty  and disruption in the air travel system.

Mike Johnson: The House speaker easily batted down an attempt  by Greene to oust him from his post, after Democrats linked arms with most Republicans  to block the motion.

Antisemitism Hearing: A Republican-led House committee turned its attention to three of the most politically liberal school districts  in the country, accusing them of tolerating antisemitism, but the district leaders pushed back forcefully .

Legalizing Marijuana: Senate Democrats reintroduced broad legislation to legalize cannabis on the federal level, a major policy shift with wide public support , but it is unlikely to be enacted this year ahead of November’s elections and in a divided government.

Hoping tensions ease, House Republicans still brace for more drama

Many House Republicans don’t believe Marjorie Taylor Greene and other agitators are going to “move on” as Speaker Mike Johnson hopes.

Shortly after House lawmakers overwhelmingly rejected Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene’s attempt to strip the gavel from a second Republican leader in the past year, Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) told her in a brief conversation on the House floor that he isn’t one to hold a grudge.

“Let’s move on, Marjorie. I’m okay with this. Let’s move on,” Johnson recounted telling Greene (R-Ga.) on “Fox & Friends” on Thursday morning. “I think we’ll have an opportunity to do that, we’ll see.”

While the threat to oust Johnson was put to rest after 196 Republicans and 163 Democrats voted to stop Greene’s effort, many House Republicans left the Capitol on Wednesday evening quipping that the menacing move was only over for now. They do not believe Greene and other agitators are going to “move on” as Johnson hopes.

What sows that doubt among most House Republicans is that their conference is fundamentally broken. While a majority of Republicans often agree with a conservative path forward, their one-vote majority emboldens a handful of hard-liners to stubbornly make demands and threaten to oppose legislation or defy leadership when they do not get what they want. The far right’s push for ideological purity has often blocked Republicans from passing conservative legislation through their own ranks.

“We can’t get 100 percent of what we want, and sometimes a handful of my colleagues demand that. It’s just not possible right now. But we’re fighting, we’re going to get this job done, and I think that’s leadership, leadership in very difficult times,” Johnson said on “Fox & Friends.”

The dynamic has forced Johnson to often rely on House Democrats to ensure legislation that President Biden must sign into law to avert crises gets through the Democratic-led Senate. That burden has fallen most on the speaker, who immediately faced critical deadlines to fund the government , reauthorize government surveillance laws and send aid to foreign allies — all issues that greatly divide House Republicans.

Such deadlines will ease for several months after Congress is expected to pass a Federal Aviation Administration bill next week but will ramp up again in the fall as House Republicans will probably spar over how to fund the government by the end of September.

Reliance on Democrats to avert a government shutdown led to the successful ouster of former Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) in October and pushed Greene to instigate a move against Johnson more than six months later.

The ability of one lawmaker in the House to trigger a vote ousting the speaker is part of an everlasting problem plaguing the majority. For the House Republican majority to govern without major disrupters that have plagued them up to this point, they’d need fundamental changes to those rules.

But Republicans recognize that punishing colleagues or changing the House rules — which would require Democrats’ help — could do more harm than good, especially in an election year. They hope Johnson also recognizes the nine members who voted with Greene and Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) often vote against leadership and may never be appeased.

“We’ve obviously had a situation during the entire time of the 118th Congress where we have members who have continually undermined the majority. So this is not a new phenomenon that we’re dealing with unfortunately. I don’t think this changes anything,” Rep. Michael Lawler (R-NY.) said.

Yet Greene’s push to oust Johnson has emboldened other flanks of the GOP conference to seek retribution for the roughly 20 Republicans who often vote against the majority. House Republicans were mad at their 11 colleagues, describing them as traitors to the party.

“I would ask you on what planet would it be an effective Republican way to legislate if you’re voting with the most radical members of the Democratic Party? The answer is: This is not conservatism,” Rep. Derrick Van Orden (R-Wis.) said. “Our constituents sent us up here to make very difficult decisions and to govern, not to do a junior high school reality television program.”

But when pressed on whether they should kick the 11 out of the GOP conference, strip them from committee assignments or punish them in other ways, the reviews were mixed.

“I think the people that are causing chaos will have to be held accountable for that,” Rep. Marcus J. Molinaro (R-N.Y.) said.

Moderate Republicans are the most vocal in calling for punishing colleagues. Greene and others who have been threatened in such a manner say they do not care if their colleagues strip them from committee assignments because they consider it a badge of honor to be rejected by Republicans who are part of “the establishment.”

Speaking to donors at a Washington fundraiser Sunday night, Johnson alluded to wanting to still lead his unruly members. If Republicans are given another shot at the majority, Johnson said they would change rules in the next Congress that would enable the speaker to govern without a constant threat of losing his job. He also noted that Republicans who refuse to endorse floor debate should get kicked off committees, according to a person who heard his remarks and spoke on the condition of anonymity to reveal what was discussed in a private meeting.

The speaker has also said punishing members could do more harm than good because every decision will probably prompt more aggressive backlash.

Republicans who seek to govern have had discussions about what they could do over the next six months to ensure the House as an institution can function, and they are open to working with Democrats on the common goal.

“I think if the Democrats are willing to — for the good of the institution and the good of the country — change the rule, then I think that’s on the table,” said Rep. Dusty Johnson (R-S.D.), who chairs the conservative Main Street Caucus, about raising the motion to vacate threshold.

If negotiations to revamp the House rules are opened, one change Republicans are discussing is outlining punishments for those who vote against the party’s wish to debate legislation, according to two people familiar with those informal discussions.

Yet in the meantime, House Republicans are hoping the lack of must-address deadlines will keep the conference focused on passing conservatives bills that can help them argue on the campaign trail that their party can govern and deserves another term in the majority.

They are wishing their rambunctious and unpredictable colleagues do not trigger another motion to vacate against Johnson.

“This is a distraction. This doesn’t help,” freshman Rep. Mike Flood (R-Neb.) said. “I’m happy with the vote today, but we have to focus on one thing going forward — and that is being unified.”

Rep. Stephanie Bice (R-Okla.) replied with a simple, “Amen.”

Republicans themselves created the conditions under which only one lawmaker — instead of the majority of one party — can trigger a vote that could remove the speaker of the House. McCarthy relented on that demand from a handful of far-right members to win over their votes so that he could become speaker . At the time, Democrats warned that the change would haunt conservatives.

Republicans sought to change their new, narrow threshold for a motion to vacate last month. But Democrats did not accept the offer to help on that front, unless Republicans agreed to more concessions.

Hard-liners, emboldened by their narrow majority and stubbornness to attain ideologically pure results, have found other ways to use existing House rules to express their displeasure against the GOP conference — and irritate colleagues.

After McCarthy and Biden agreed on spending limits in exchange for Republican support to raise the debt ceiling last May, a handful of far-right members broke a 20-year precedent and voted against a rule in a move that halted floor debate in the House for a full week.

To end the blockade , McCarthy agreed to breach the deal made with Biden and appease hard-liners by funding the government at significantly lower levels, a promise that was unachievable and would later make far-right members recoil in anger. Hard-liners have gone on to block rules almost 10 times since last May, because it has worked to earn concessions.

Hard-liners’ tactics have caused some conservatives to regret not immediately pursuing a change in their House rules to somehow punish those who vote against the majority, according to multiple Republicans familiar with the matter who spoke on the condition of anonymity to speak freely about conference dynamics.

McCarthy also put two members of the staunchly conservative House Freedom Caucus and Massie — who co-sponsored Greene’s push to eject Johnson — on the House Rules Committee, leading the three hard-liners to sometimes block bills from reaching the floor at all. The trio, which includes Reps. Chip Roy (R-Tex.) and Ralph Norman (R-S.C.), recently blocked consideration of a border security bill that included a majority of conference-approved provisions because they were angry at Johnson’s foreign aid bill proposal.

Blocking rules has forced Johnson to circumvent the Rules Committee — which prepares bills to pass through a simple majority — and turn to the “suspension calendar” that requires two-thirds of the House for legislation to be adopted. In other words, it forces governing Republicans to rely on Democrats to pass bills.

“What they’re doing is they’re actually forcing a majority of us to have to be more bipartisan because they’ve empowered the Democrats,” Rep. Don Bacon (R-Neb.) said.

He added, “We’ll have to govern in a more bipartisan way because of this small handful who are trying to undermine the speaker, shut down the House, and therefore you have to work across the aisle to get things done. That’s the math.”

Theodoric Meyer and Leigh Ann Caldwell contributed to this report.

The Assignment: How Speaker Mike Johnson Has Survived So Far CNN Politics

When Mike Johnson worked with Democrats to pass Ukraine war funding, he knew it would enrage the extreme right-wing and threaten his speakership. So far, Johnson has survived the challenge to his job, and as Doug Heye puts it, “survival is strength.” Heye has worked for Republicans in the House and Senate and is a former communications director for the Republican National Committee. He’ll describe the tightrope Mike Johnson must walk in order lead House Republicans back to a majority in November. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

• More Episodes