Will Thomas Massie Get To Pick the Next Speaker of the House?
The libertarian-adjacent congressman says he "definitely has no Fs to give now" and promises to vote against Mike Johnson.

It's nearly time once again for everyone's favorite congressional game show: Who Can Get Elected Speaker of the House?
When the new session of Congress opens on Friday, one of the first orders of business will be deciding who gets to hold the gavel. Despite a Republican takeover of the White House and the Senate, November's election did not do much to change or lessen the drama in the House, where the GOP still clings to a very narrow majority. As in the past few years, that means any Republican who wants to be speaker needs to secure support from nearly all of his party's members in the chamber.
Current Speaker of the House Mike Johnson (R–La.) has the "Complete & Total Endorsement" of President-elect Donald Trump in his bid to retain the gavel. That might be all it takes to come out on top. It certainly doesn't hurt. Resistance to Johnson's reelection "is now futile," former Rep. Matt Gaetz (R–Fla.), who led the effort to oust Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R–Calif.) from the speakership, told the New York Post earlier this week.
But nothing is a sure bet in this House of Representatives until the last votes have been counted, and there's at least one Republican who is vowing to resist Johnson's reelection.
Rep. Thomas Massie (R–Ky.), the libertarian-adjacent lawmaker who holds a post on the powerful House Rules Committee, tells The Wall Street Journal that he will vote against Johnson's reelection as speaker. And he apparently doesn't care what consequences he might face for complicating the speakership vote.
"I don't know how to say this without cussing," Massie told the Journal. "If they thought I had no Fs to give before, I definitely have no Fs to give now." (That's possibly the second-best Massie quote of all time, though it's still well behind his 2017 theory of what Republican primary voters are doing.)
Specifically, Massie is upset with Johnson over his support for military aid to Ukraine, his support for reauthorizing a domestic spying program, and his handling of the continuing resolution drama last month. Trump's "endorsement of Mike Johnson is going to work out about as well as his endorsement of Speaker Paul Ryan," Massie posted on X this week.
Massie, it's worth noting, opposed the ouster of McCarthy, which eventually led to Johnson ascending to the House's highest post. Just before McCarthy got the boot, Massie warned that the next speaker would likely be worse and that ongoing chaos in the House would give greater leverage to Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D–N.Y.) on issues that really matter, like spending.
Whether Johnson has been a worse speaker than McCarthy depends on your perspective, but that second prediction turned out to be essentially true. The House passed several budget bills last year, but all withered in the Senate and the year ended with another Christmastime fight over a continuing resolution that did not reduce spending (and, in fact, increased it).
For now, it remains an open question whether Massie has enough support to hold up Johnson's reelection. He wouldn't need much help.
Here's the basic math: There are 435 seats in the House, which means it would require 218 votes to win a majority, if all the seats are full on Friday. Republicans won 220 seats in November, but at least one of those is likely to be vacant—Gaetz has said he does not plan to return to Congress after resigning last month, even though he would be eligible to return when the new session begins. Other seats will be vacated in the near future, since several sitting Republicans have been appointed to posts in the Trump administration, but that's unlikely to affect Friday's speakership vote.
The narrowness of the majority means that any handful of Republican lawmakers could hold up the process of picking a speaker—and nothing else can happen in the chamber until that selection is made.
Massie says he has nothing to lose. That won't be enough to stop Johnson's return as speaker, but it won't take a whole lot more.
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
This is Treason.cum PRETENDING to report a "just the facts Ma'am" news report, butt they TOTALLY forgot to (editorially) report MY well-supported theory that the Lizard People (pulling the puppet strings on the Demon-Craps) are now ascendant over the Amphibian People, which pull the puppet strings on the "Team R" Uber-Patriots and Freedom Frighters!!!
This is an UDDER MOCKERY of TRUE Libertarian Principals, damn-shit!!!!
Please tell me, WHY does Treason.cum support the Lizard People and the Demon-Craps?
Massie may have nothing to lose, but does he have anything to gain?
The problem for any Speaker is still going to be that the GOP only has a two seat majority, so any GOP member can scuttle a bill on their own unless the leadership can attract Democrat votes, which means the deals for that will make the legislation fiscally worse. It is a formula for unplayable compromises, not fiscal sanity.
So what does Massie think to gain by being obstinate?
Massie seems fine with shutdowns.
I agree with Massie on shutdowns.
Only Republicans are blamed for shutdowns.
Can't libertarians get some blame for shutdowns once in a while? You could shut down 25% of the federal government tomorrow, and I'd be happy.
No one cares about them outside of DC and the democrat media.
I have no problem with government shutdowns.
The more the better.
Shutdowns have no real political fallout. Only people in the beltway delude themselves into believing that. The average voter isn’t even aware of them when they happen, nor would they vote on them.
Shutdowns only matter to people who have already made up their mind.
Unplayable compromise, you say? What do they do with it in other countries and in many states of the US?
One would hope.
Thomas Massie
@RepThomasMassie
On January 3rd, 2017 Paul Ryan was elected Speaker by every Republican except me. Ryan went on to offer a fake repeal of ObamaCare, increased spending, backed the deep state, and didn’t fund a wall. Two years later we lost the majority and democrats made a living hell for Trump.
Thomas Massie
@RepThomasMassie
I will vote for someone other than Mike Johnson. I’m not persuaded by the “hurry up and elect him so we can certify the election on J6” argument. A weak legislative branch, beholden to the swamp, will not be able to achieve the mandate voters gave Trump and Congress in November.
Mike Johnson lost any right to be speaker when he let the FBI cow him into supporting the extension of Section 702.
The problem is you just know the GOPe are trying to get ready to #resist and they're going to vote for someone even worse than Paul Ryan. You can see them starting to man the barricades with John Thune replacing McConnell as Senate leader.
Rep Massie is committing the equivalent of political pyromania.
No Speaker = no advancement of Pres Trump's agenda
There are only ~700 days to get this shit done.
Whether Johnson has been a worse speaker than McCarthy depends on your perspective, but that second prediction turned out to be essentially true. The House passed several budget bills last year, but all withered in the Senate and the year ended with another Christmastime fight over a continuing resolution that did not reduce spending (and, in fact, increased it).
So Chuck Schumer was the one demanding more spending. But we will blame the house GOP despite passing bills. Got it.
Yep, it sucks, but the game is not called fairly.
In my Chartertopia, there's no possibility of Speakers and other nasty little hobgoblins controlling what bills can be voted on, or where and how. Instead, every legislator is responsible for his own bill. Bills have to be available for 30 days public review before legislators can approve them, and if not approved within 90 days, they die. If they reach 2/3 approval in all chambers at once, whether that's on the 30th day or the 90th or any time in between, they pass the legislature, and there's no Supreme Mugwump who has to sign them or can veto them.
Nothing stops legislators from forming shadow committees, or political parties creating lists of bills for members to submit, approve, or ignore. But their power is strictly within the party, and legislators who thumb their nose at party rules are answerable only to voters.
the 6-week behind closed doors with Mike Johnson led to their attempt to codify "criminal defendant" as "justice-involved person"
So, if he's not voting for Johnson, is he going 'full Iowa' and just voting for the craziest son-of-a-bitch in the race?
Anybody whose idea of compromise is better than 90% of what democrats want for 10% of what the GOP wants would be better than Johnson.
Don't forget it's also 90% of what AIPAC wants.
We Iowans are proud of that.
I don't blame you at all.
Last I checked Trump hates the guy which means whatever he says or thinks is wrong.
Ugh, I see you survived new years somehow.
Good thing he doesn’t spend much time here anymore.
You've been corrected on this point many times dumbass. You're msnbc talking points are old and stale. Stop drinking yourself more stupid than you are.
https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/4954246-massie-endorses-trump-2024/
https://apnews.com/article/2022-midterm-elections-donald-trump-kentucky-thomas-massie-1a75ba7b28a5f889210e703a72b85630
Your maddow inspired knowledge is just retarded.
Glad you've finally desisted on your 'Trump Cult' blaming ...
And have resorted to cementing in your 'Trump-Hate Cult' mentality.
ONE thing is undeniable is your OCD over 'Trump'.
Commonly termed as TDS.
Too bad Massie will never get anywhere near that job. At least he can throw a monkey wrench into the machine for a while, which I also approve.
Thomas Massie is one of the least liked person in congress because he is honest, is a libertarian and worst of all, has no AIPAC controller.!!!
Now if only there were more like him and less like little Chuckles Schumer, Adam Schiff and Jamie Ratskin.
I would like to see Massie introduce a bill in congress that would seriously weaken AIPAC, the ADL and the SPLC. He could also introduce a bill that would cut off all funding to the FBI. I can only dream of such.
Yeah. Trump does have a horrible competency rate at picking the right people. His best move would be to refer to Massie for picks just as he has referred to Musk over the budget.
This all strikes me as another example of how the Constitution and other aspects of our federal and state governments could only work as intended if there weren't political parties. The outright majority of seats are won by members of one party - but the Speaker will be voted on by all members. Thus, even small amounts of dissension among the winning party can turn the whole exercise of electing a Speaker into a clusterfuck. No one with sense would design it that way on purpose.
Editors here are awfully cheeky to declare someone else only libertarian-adjacent.
I've been seeing people that call themselves libertarian describe their political ideas and values for my whole adult life of over 30 years. I'd say "libertarian-adjacent" is as close to libertarian as any Republican has ever been. This is also true of anyone that's ever commented around here, I would say.
Massie is about as "libertarian-adjacent" as Nancy Pelosi. He's just another right-wing nutjob.