Mike Johnson Is the Unlikely New Speaker of the House
Johnson is a relative newcomer to Congress who has never even chaired a committee, and he is a close ally of former President Donald Trump.

Chaos is a ladder—and Rep. Mike Johnson (R–La.) has successfully climbed it.
Johnson was elected Speaker of the House of Representatives in a narrow 220-209 vote on Wednesday afternoon, capping an unprecedented three-week period where the House did not have a speaker following the ejection of Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R–Calif.) from the top role. Since then, several more prominent Republicans have tried and failed to secure the speakership. Johnson, a relatively new and low-ranking member to make the jump to speaker, ultimately captured the prize by securing support from the right-wing faction that deposed McCarthy and the centrists that blocked the ascendency of other alternatives like Rep. Jim Jordan (R–Ohio).
"Until yesterday, I had never contacted one person about this, and I have never before aspired to the office," Johnson posted on X, formerly known as Twitter, on Saturday night, shortly after announcing his candidacy for speaker.
But Johnson had to wait through more chaos before becoming the unlikely front-runner for the post. He won an internal Republican vote on Tuesday night to become the fourth speaker-designee since McCarthy was booted on October 3. In the aftermath of that vote, even many Republicans who hadn't supported Johnson signaled their willingness to vote for him and end the circus that has consumed the House this month.
Perhaps the most important show of support for Johnson came from former President Donald Trump, who posted on Truth Social that he "strongly" suggested Republicans back Johnson's bid. On Tuesday, Trump played a significant role in killing the speakership bid of Rep. Tom Emmer (R–Minn.), clearing the way for the late-night vote that put Johnson on the path to victory Wednesday.
Prior to Wednesday's vote, Johnson served as the vice chairman of the House Republican Conference. Johnson, 51, was first elected to Congress in 2016 and has never chaired a committee. He became a close ally of Trump's and served on the defense team during both of Trump's impeachments.
Johnson also played a vocal role in supporting Trump's attempts to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election. In October 2022, The New York Times called Johnson "the most important architect of the Electoral College objections" that were at the center of Trump's last-ditch effort to stop President Joe Biden from being declared the election's winner by Congress. The Times notes that Johnson's objections were based on constitutional and legal issues, not flagrantly false claims of voter fraud. He led a House Republican effort to lend support to at least one lawsuit that aimed to overturn the election results in several states.
But what Johnson does next is probably more important than anything he did in 2020 and 2021. There are now just three weeks until the current continuing resolution will expire, leaving scant time for the new speaker to negotiate with the Senate and Biden administration over the federal government's next major budget bill.
And it remains unclear whether Johnson has made political promises that will further complicate that already fraught process. In a statement released Wednesday, moderate Rep. Andrew R. Garbarino (R–N.Y.), said in a statement that he would support Johnson because the new speaker "acknowledges that providing [state and local tax] relief is critical for middle-class Americans burdened by double taxation and must be addressed in any tax bill the House considers." As I've previously covered, that would be a foolish fiscal and political trade-off for any new speaker to make.
Even with all those issues swirling around the House, Johnson's election to the top post probably has a good bit more to do with personalities than policies. He won "probably because he has the fewest enemies of anyone in the Republican conference," Rep. Ken Buck (R–Colo.) told CNN as the votes for Johnson were still being tallied up.
That's far from a ringing endorsement—but after three weeks of nonsense in the House, it'll have to do.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Love how redressing grievances with the government is now viewed as an insurrection.
Yet another Constitutional right Boehm opposes.
When it's done peaceably. Or did you miss that part?
I thought "riots were the voice of the powerless" or some such bullshit.
Or did that end just as 2020 did?
1/6 was the most peaceful protest we've seen in this country in many years.
Sort of like how the antiwar movement vanished in a poof of smoke in January 2009.
Code Pink still kicking:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Code_Pink
By 2009 everyone knew that the Iraq War was a total waste and the Financial Crisis became the most important issue.
Lost job/home > war.
turd, the ass-clown of the commentariat, lies; it’s all he ever does. turd is a kiddie diddler, and a pathological liar, entirely too stupid to remember which lies he posted even minutes ago, and also too stupid to understand we all know he’s a liar.
If anything he posts isn’t a lie, it’s totally accidental.
turd lies; it’s what he does. turd is a lying pile of lefty shit.
No Kiddie Raper. Your democrat masters never gave a shit about the war. It was just a tool to take power. Your kind doesn’t have integrity, or principles.
That doesn't mean that only the powerless riot, nor that the cause is just.
I have no problem with citizens storming the Capitol, regardless of the cause. After all, it is the property of the US public.
"When it’s done peaceably. Or did you miss that part?"
You are a fucking lying piece of shit, aren't you.
What violence did Trump or his lawyers commit? They are being charged criminally. Or did you miss that part shrike?
And my streak of continuing not to be shrike continues unabated.
Are there any crimes you think Trump has actually committed, amongst all those he's been charged with?
Agreed, though not a Trump supporter.
It was mostly peaceful.
The CIA and FBI employees were "agents provocateurs".
It was an inside job,never would have happened without FBI impetus.
Johnson is a relative newcomer to Congress who has never even chaired a committee, and he is a close ally of former President Donald Trump.
Well hot damn, I was already for him. No need to tease me afterwards.
Ha, I agree with your statements. Plus, for me, he is from Louisiana. Cannot wait for him to say "hold my beer, watch this."
I’m hoping the Republican party will split into a Conservative party that defends conservative principles, and a Trump party that defends the man’s latest tweet. As it is there are people trying to do both, and it just doesn't work.
The Democrats actually had that chance during the first Trump term.
Someone like Richard Gephardt or Tom Daschle would have subtly goaded Trump into picking fights with the Republican congressional leadership.
The NeverTrumpers v 1.0 actually feared that thisis exactly what would happen.
Instead, the Dem leadership chose the “Trump Colluded with the Russians®™ to Steal the 2016 Election” propaganda campaign.
And then the Democrats could split into the Democratic Socialists, the Cultural Marxists, and Super Woke sub-parties, and then we could switch over to a parliamentary system that would maybe even allow currently non-mainstream parties like Green, Constitution, or Libertarian to seat a few members of Congress.
All it would require is a complete overhaul of the constitution that a supermajority of congress and most of the states could agree to . . .
The Democrats don't have a cult of personality ruining what they stand for.
They had Obama, who was a cult of personality for sure. But that was mostly around race. He didn't take the political party, jettison all principles, cut a hole in the center, and try to make it into a poncho.
If they want to split up that's great. The more parties the merrier.
My point is that principled conservatives have no business supporting the businessman-in-chief.
....explains why so many Obama retreads run the Biden WH.
Because not a cult.
At all.
No one is jumping out and accusing Biden critics of being ageist. Not that I’ve seen. They’re not engaging in the cult-of-personality defense, which is always ad hominem.
Obamabots accused his detractors of racism. Don’t like his policies? You’re racist.
Trumptards accuse his detractors of TDS. Don’t like his policies? You’re mentally ill.
There is no cult of personality around Biden.
Because Biden has no personality?
I'm sure he had one at one time, but can't remember where he put it.
Joe Cool and Dark Brandon continue to laugh at you. And their cult is one of institutions. One you belong to. Government control of all aspects of life.
And their cult is one of institutions.
If that's what you want to call the Progressive administrative state, I suppose it could be framed that way.
One you belong to.
I've never defended progressives. If anything I try to chide people into being more conservative. Stop saying disagreement with Trump equals support for the left.
Trump isn't the right. So one can support the right while rejecting both Biden and Trump.
Oh, I get it.
You were trying to equate private institutions with federal bureaucracy.
Then you could quote me saying that institutions matter, knowing I'm not talking about federal bureaucracy, and say I support federal bureaucracy.
I've said it before and I'll say it again, I will be shocked if you ever say something honest.
They had Obama
Actually, progressives hated Obama for his centrism.
Poor, poor, poor shitbag turd, hardest hit.
turd lies. turd lies when he knows he’s lying. turd lies when we know he’s lying. turd lies when he knows that we know he’s lying.
turd lies. turd is a lying pile of lefty shit and a pederast besides.
Fuck off and die, asshole.
Remember. He thinks media matters is non partisan.
His defenders shouted "'Racism" as if it was a rebuttal to his health care bill, just as JesseAz et al scream "TDS" when someone brings up free trade.
More false equivalence from the drunken pussy.
Pour Sarc.
Hahahaha,go flush yourself.
What principles sarc? You keep making bold, broad, ignorant claims. The people you want to control the GOP were neocons who backed the state.
Your irrational hatred and devotion to obedience to the state keeps becoming apparent as that is what you’re arguing for. The principled gop you continue to pine for was the neocons. The Romney, Bushs, kristols, etc.
Is this why you’ve been on the wrong side of every constitutional principle since 2016? Censorship, mandates, taxes, political lawfare, etc?
I'm talking about principles and you go directly to people, which only proves what I'm talking about.
You have no principles, you sniveling, alcoholic pussy. Now fuck off.
I know, right? Trump brought in all those icky blue-collar voters whom the Republicans lost due to outsourcing and offshoring. A real disaster for the party.
I must have missed the part of the Constitution that requires two-party system?
No, its not you, someone else is just missing half a frontal lobe.
Personality cults rarely split along ideological lines.
Personality cults have no principles. Just a principal.
So you can't have a party based upon principles with a principal.
Ditch or split. Can't do both.
Cults of personality don’t split on ideological lines because the ideology revolves around the ideologue. The leader.
The Republican Party has traditionally been a place where people who oppose abortion or support free markets or like their guns end up finding a reluctant political home. Pick an issue, decide on a party based upon it, and most likely adopt the rest of the party’s stances. That's how you make friends! Then wonder if that stance is tribalism or predisposition.
Problem is that the Republican Party can’t decide if it’s running on planks or putting one man out on a plank.
Do they serve conservative ideals, or Trump?
Can’t do both.
There is a cult of personality around Trump. But I really don't think it accounts for most of his support. There are an awful lot of people who support him despite, not because of, his personality, inconsistency, etc.
People with principles who saw the entirety of corporations, media, and government turned against one man.
I don't give a shit about any of the charges against Trump.
What bothers me is the principle of the matter.
Started with every president being impeached, to the point where the opposing party has papers drafted before the guy is sworn in.
Then the loser started disputing the election with arguments that were made long before the votes were counted.
Now we've got all of the above, plus criminal and civil proceedings against the loser?
Fuck, man. It's shameful.
Yes pussy, you’re shameful.
How many times do I have to say it before you stop calling me a liar and telling me what I really think?
Support someone who is inconsistent and has an abrasive personality?
I should run for office!
Au contraire; look at you and the other TDS-addled cultists, chicken little.
Defending conservative principles doesn't really mean shit, though, if you're not actually going to follow through by putting your neck on the line to promote them, irrespective of what the cool kids will think. And acting as if social conservatism isn't going to have a say in that, but should still support the GOP regardless, is what resulted in Trump taking over the party.
While Trump benefitted from some good luck thanks to RBG's stubbornness and recommendations from Cocaine Mitch, ultimately he's the one that ensured the social conservatives finally got what their Holy Grail, which was the end of Roe. Meanwhile, the center-right's darling, Nikki Haley, is trying to convince GOP voters to figure out what arbitrary length of time the Democrats will let them have as far as abortion restrictions, as if the Democrats would be in any frame of mind to do that.
That's why fetishizing "ideas" and "principles" is completely pointless if the only idea or principle ultimately boils down to, "What will the other team generously bestow on us?"
More to the point–Gaetz might be a spastic, but no one can say that he’s afraid of being mocked by the cool kids. The neocons might still be in charge of the party if they had that much "don't give a fuck" attitude towards the left-liberal establishment.
Guess free speech is not a conseravtive principle in need of defending. Or maybe just Trump's free speech. Seem to recall somebody whining about Hunter Biden being singled out for political reasons.
Sarc defended Mackey getting 7 months over a meme. And he talks principles.
You bookmarked me saying that the sentence was excessive, yet you whisper the opposite into peoples’ ears?
Shameless.
I’m getting along with productive things today. Who knows what you’ll say about me when I’m gone. Tupla impersonated me when I wasn’t around to defend myself.
I’m sure you’ll do something similar.
Have fun!
"Tupla impersonated me when I wasn’t around to defend myself."
Every time Sarckles gets a few beers in himself and starts feeling trollish, mean Ol' Mister Tulpa comes by to ruin his good name.
Yep, ‘Tulpa’ is code for Sarc downing a fifth of bottom shelf liquor.
One that supports government censorship, new wars, mandates, and will bow down to the DNC party when the media criticizes them - sarc.
"I’m hoping the Republican party will split into a Conservative party that defends conservative principles"
After a decade of hearing you bark about how much you hate conservatives, perhaps you'll forgive me for suspecting that you might be concern trolling.
Just like Trump never worked a (physical) day in his life.
What makes you think the speaker has any special influence in legislation, or really any H.R. business that doesn't require his official participation as such? As far as I can tell, his election is just a momentary meter of relative political strengths within the body.
Sure, but it's also an indication of how internally organized a party is, at least at the House level. Her political positions aside, no one can dispute that Nancy Pelosi kept the Dems locked in tight and focused for her entire time as either Speaker or Majority Leader for two decades. When AOC came in and spent her first few months tard-raging on social media against Democrat incumbents, her chief of staff got clapped with insinuations in the press of campaign finance violations, and a visit in Pelosi's office that saw her brought to heel almost immediately. She got a lesson from a master politician that you don't fuck with the party or its agenda to chase social media clicks.
The GOP hasn't really had a Speaker with that level of intensity since Gingrich.
Obama/Pelosi bitch-slapped the far left repeatedly. When Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel called the left "fucking retarded" it set the ground rules.
I loved it.
turd lies. turd lies when he knows he’s lying. turd lies when we know he’s lying. turd lies when he knows that we know he’s lying.
turd lies. turd is a TDS-addled lying pile of lefty shit and a pederast besides.
Obama/Pelosi bitch-slapped the far left repeatedly.
The far-left is less of a problem than the party's fascist "middle". Authoritarian robber-barons and pseudo-aristocratic oligarchs masquerading as "centrists", who'd sacrifice their own child to Moloch for power and money.
Trudat!
If the dems didn't do what Pelosi said, CCP spies would discuss the error of their ways. You don't really think that enforcer was a driver, do you?
after three weeks of nonsense in the House, it'll have to do.
Now they can get on with another year of nonsense. Our national nightmare is over.
You misspelled "continues".
It wasn't a "narrow" margin, the democrats were never going to vote for any republican and every republican voted for him. It's as large a margin as was possible.
Always liked this guy.
Let's see if he lives up to his past performance.
the centrists that blocked the ascendency of other alternatives like Rep. Jim Jordan
You misspelled 'RINO's'.
Haha. I believe that is the L strategy to maintain purity and to keep the tent small.
Nah, the real Republicans are the squish establishment middle, neocon warmongers and other useless cunts, unfortunately. Parties are just big, fairly arbitrary groups that shift around to keep the vote roughly evenly divided.
Parties are just big, fairly arbitrary groups that shift around to keep the vote roughly evenly divided.
I have said that with analogies to trading cards to pro wrestling.
And, sadly, I think that is also the reason we are stuck with two major parties. I would love to see a more viable small government party, but I'm afraid it just doesn't have much of a constituency.
A small-govt third-party could have a role if it stopped trying to influence via elections. The US has, by far, the highest barriers to entry for elections. That is all deliberate because those barriers to entry help turn incumbents into dynasts and ensure that corruption by EXISTING money is far cheaper than anywhere on Earth. Both of those two ensure bigger government and more unrepresentative government. If the LP accomplished anything in its existence, it made sure that no possibilities remain in expanding ballot access or debates or anything else within the partisan election system.
There is a lot that can be done via audits, investigations, FOIA, public humiliation, embarrassment, transparency, exposing cover-ups, etc. It doesn't take an elected body to perform those functions in a way that would quickly become 'representative' of broader concerns. And while the existing media doesn't do any of this anymore (and likely won't), it is entirely possible that some new iteration of media could take on the communication elements of the above.
And there is a huge constituency for something radically different when polls like 'country moving in wrong direction or right direction', approvals of Presidents/congress/institutions, etc have been on the side of radical change for going on decades now.
That doesn't mean anyone else wants some rigidly ideological change that you do. It means that someone who has acquired credibility about the actual problems we have will be given a ton of brooms to clean up the stables. And not via a cult of personality.
Most people want less government. Just don't cut anything that hurts me, my family, or my friends.
"My mom depends on that program. Paid in all her life."
"I pay for that National Park."
"My niece benefits from this program."
"My friend works for the government."
So in the end everyone wants to cut government, but nobody can agree on what.
Most programs could be reduced by 25+% without any change in what they do. Someone who has the ability to accomplish that then gets credibility to do more. Fail to accomplish something and no one cares about their 'ideas'
Because the duopoly continues to exclude anyone outside of their comfortable partnership, that allows the Republicrats to maintain its power.
Johnson is a big-time Bible-Beater totalitarian type. Not a good start.
#MoreGridlock
turd, the TDS-addled ass-clown of the commentariat, lies; it’s all he ever does. turd is a kiddie diddler, and a pathological liar, entirely too stupid to remember which lies he posted even minutes ago, and also too stupid to understand we all know he’s a liar.
If anything he posts isn’t a lie, it’s totally accidental.
turd lies; it’s what he does. turd is a lying pile of lefty shit.
I know fuck all about him, but your downvote is just about the greatest endorsement a man can ever receive.
You beat me to it.
A God-damned poor start.
I hope this signals the end of the Imperial Speakership! It was traditional for Speakers of the House to rule with an iron fist, ramming legislation through the House with little debate, wielding the "rules" as if they were the Constitution itself. Now if they could just root out the entrenched "go along to get along" fund-raising is king rewards system we could all get back to a more representative form of government - at least in the Congress - and maybe tone down the culture wars a notch.
Nah. The culture wars are the only entertainment of politics.
I wish, but I don't hope for that.
Of course, the first section of remarks the new speaker gave from the rostrum was a sermon.
Pols who use government facilities to push their religions should get a bill for fair market value of the rent for the space, broadcast equipment, etc.
I'd also like "e pluribus unum" back as the national motto.
I'd prefer "Don't tread on me" and disregard the religious mumbo-jumbo.
"...and he is a close ally of former President Donald Trump."
The screams and fore-lock tuggings of TDS-addled shits will be much appreciated.
>>but after three weeks of nonsense in the House, it'll have to do.
(D) harder. the House being open for business in the nonsense.
Americans are not ready for self-government. The leaders are power mad lunatics and the voters are fools. We could have had a centrist Congress had the Dems supported McCarthy. Now Trump controls Congress.
I missed the part where Trump controls the (Democrat run) Senate.
It is odd that Trump snapped his fingers and EVERY single Republican fell in line behind a total nobody. But I still think this is a case of giving the rebels what they want and then working to undermine it. That single person removal mechanism is still there, and Johnson's #1 item is... aid to Israel.
At least he is anti Ukraine aid, but the Israel aid is just putting the horse (corruption and money laundering) in a different barn and hoping nobody notices. I'm sure Bibi is more than happy to play ball. Although I suppose at least the corruption will come cheaper than it did in Ukraine. Hooray, I guess? ????
Great.
Now get rid of the rule one clown can wreck the car.
Then pass the regular order budget bills.
Then pass laws severely restricting the scope and length of emergency executive orders.
Then get rid of the FBI & DOJ. Or at least the top four levels of corruption.
Then you can go campaign for reelection.
Don’t get rid of one clown can wreck the car.
Instead, make it so one clown can wreck the car only IF the government gets funded by omnibus/CR.
Not having some mechanism to hold the speaker to account means more CR/omnibus tyranny.
Also Gaetz did more for fiscal sanity than Conservative Inc establishment uniparty goons who just want to do crazy ultra far left Democrat communist things anyway, just with extra tax cuts. McCarthy wasn’t representing his party’s base when cutting dirty deals for Ukraine aid, he failed in his promises, and Gaetz – unlike most politicians – did EXACTLY what he said he would do.
Now it is time to put uniparty politicians on notice: if you constantly sell out your own voters, you do NOT get to go back to DC to keep doing it.
Rewarding yet ANOTHER omnibus/CR changes nothing. The only way things change is with intransigent revolutionary titanium cojones.
Going along to get along currently costs $2 trillion in debt and 5-9% inflation per year (actually more but those are the lying government’s own numbers). That “bargain” sucks hairy donkey balls.
Agreed.
Johnson also played a vocal role in supporting Trump's attempts to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election
Ha ha ha, you half-assed Democrat.
Well, the “experienced” speakers have driven our country into the ground. We are $35 trillion in debt and will add another $1.7 trillion to that this year. An inexperienced speaker couldn’t do any worse. As for the upcoming budget negotiations, take your time. Don’t be afraid to shut the governor down. They’d do less damage.
haremo