NEW RULES, JUST RIGHT? Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene’s recent failed attempt to oust Johnson fueled fresh calls inside the GOP for House rules changes to defang future rebels. Now, many of those Republicans are acknowledging any changes will likely have to wait until November — but that isn’t stopping them from quietly laying the groundwork now. News on that front: The governing-minded Main Street Caucus has formed an internal working group to come up with potential changes to the Republican Conference and House rules. The group of approximately 10 members is being led by Rep. Nick LaLota (R-N.Y.). The group, LaLota told us, is looking at how to “find more order within the conference, more accountability” for those who work against the leadership agenda. It's TBD where exactly the group will end up, he said — and we'll note it's moot if Republicans lose the House in November. Historically, LaLota noted, members of the majority have voted in lockstep to adopt the special rules that allow control of the legislation that comes to the floor. And, needless to say, they’ve not threatened to remove the speaker using the so-called motion to vacate. Now those norms are routinely broken, he said, “which [has] made things chaotic.” What they’re mulling: What we’ve heard from Republicans — including, but not limited to, members of Main Street — is a desire to build into conference rules specific consequences for steps such as voting against rules or trying to oust members of leadership. Several GOP members have floated removing members from their committees, while a few have gone further and discussed potentially ejecting members from the conference. As for the House rules, many members have endorsed raising the threshold for the motion to vacate above the current single-member standard — Republicans' own conference rules for this Congress put it at the significantly higher standard of a majority of their members before then-leader Kevin McCarthy agreed to the lower bar as he sought the speakership. Why it won’t be smooth sailing: Despite the growing frustration, don’t expect changes without a bit of an internal conference fight. “I don’t think they ought to change it at all,” Rep. Ralph Norman (R-S.C.) said about raising the motion-to-vacate threshold. Freedom Caucus members, including Norman, recently privately urged Johnson not to change it — a detail first reported by POLITICO. And talk of building specific consequences into the conference rules could face wrinkles, too. Even if a majority of the conference agreed to the change during their internal deliberations in November, opponents might still be free to leverage their January speaker votes to force their withdrawal, depending on the size of the majority and the size of the opposition. “I don’t really give a crap. You want consequences? Okay, then you are focusing on small ball. Because you’ve still got to get the votes,” said Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas). “They are welcome to propose rules and if they want to pass those rules then they are going to have to figure out how to get a speaker elected.” Two other rules-related tidbits: Roy still seemed interested in an idea that he and Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick (R-Pa.) floated back in October — requiring any speaker candidate to get 218 in the preliminary conference vote rather than the simple majority currently needed to become nominee. And we’ve heard interest from multiple GOP lawmakers in providing clearer guidance in House rules for what powers an acting speaker can wield should a future speaker be ousted. — Jordain Carney GOOD EVENING! Welcome to Inside Congress, the play-by-play guide to all things Capitol Hill, on this Thursday, May 30, where we are co-signing Kyle’s periodic reminder.
| 
