Republicans have grown increasingly frustrated as more of their colleagues leave them in the lurch by resigning early, including the typically pragmatic Rep. Mike Gallagher.
After Gallagher’s surprising departure, Republicans will have virtually no margin for error on partisan bills: They can only lose one vote and still pass legislation without help from Democrats.
That margin will rise back to two after the May 22 runoff between two Republicans vying to replace former President Kevin McCarthy.
The narrow margin is irritating Republicans who have pledged to serve a full two-year term and intend to remain in office until the November general election to protect the Republican majority.
Republicans have grown increasingly frustrated as more of their colleagues leave them in the lurch by resigning early, including the typically pragmatic Rep. Mike Gallagher.
Rep. Ken Buck, R-Colo., left the House last Friday.
And they have begun pointing fingers at how Gallagher, R-Wis., was able to leave without a solid plan to fill his seat with another Republican to govern for the eight months until the election.
A source close to Gallagher told DailyMail.com that the House Republican leadership “was aware of and approved” his schedule to leave on April 19.
But a source familiar with President Johnson’s thinking rejected that characterization.
“The president has encouraged Gallagher to stay on during his term, so I don’t think it’s accurate to say he’s blessed the whole situation,” the source said. “He tried to encourage him to stay during the period.”
Gallagher, who chairs the high-profile China subcommittee, is the sixth House Republican to leave the post before his term ends. Everyone resigned except George Santos, who was expelled.
A source close to the leadership insisted to DailyMail.com that it is “absolutely false” to say Gallagher’s departure was approved by House Republican leaders.
Another 21 Republicans announced they will not seek re-election, as did 25 Democrats.
A source close to the leadership insisted to DailyMail.com that it is “absolutely false” to say Gallagher’s departure was approved by House Republican leaders.
“People are really angry that he won’t leave the seat early enough to activate a special, so that’s just not true.”
But under Wisconsin’s complicated election law, Gallagher’s departure date could have led to two different scenarios.
If you leave between April 9 and May 14, a special primary and special election will be combined with the regular primary on August 13 and the general election on November 5.
The winner of the Nov. 5 special election could take office as soon as House rules allow, filling a Republican seat in the days immediately following the 2024 election.
But if Gallagher were to leave before April 9, primary and special elections could be called at the whim of Democratic Gov. Tony Evers.
First Evers could hold special elections, according to wisconsin codeIt’s August 23rd. But that would go against another provision of the Wisconsin code: ‘Special elections may not be held… after August 1 prior to the general elections, unless they are held on the same day as the general elections.’
Therefore, Evers could easily push back the special election date to the same time as or even after the Nov. 5 general election date.
Still, Republicans took advantage of Gallagher’s exit campaign.
“The timing couldn’t be worse,” said Florida Rep. Anna Paulina Luna. ‘If you wait, we basically won’t be able to fill that position. So I would publicly ask him to do the right thing and resign early.”
“It has to stay,” New York Republican Rep. Claudia Tenney said earlier this week on Fox News.
‘We are dangerous. In the meantime, we could have a president, Hakeem Jeffries, here while we wait for a special election.
‘Personally, if you’re going to commit to the people who elect you, that you’re going to serve for two years unless you have a very good reason not to serve, then why would you do that?’ Tenney continued.
The New York Republican alluded to the very real possibility that Democrats could capture the GOP majority if more members resigned early, resulting in Jeffries being elevated to chairman.
It would be the first time in history that control of a chamber would change mid-Congress.
Wisconsin Republican Rep. Tom Tiffany told DailyMail.com that he was “surprised” both by Gallagher’s earlier decision not to run for re-election and even more so by his decision not to extend his term.
“I was a little surprised that he wasn’t running for one more term,” he said. “When he announced that he wasn’t going to run I thought he was going to stay until the end of his term, but clearly, there were other things that I’m not familiar with.”
“I know Mike has a young family and the time pressures that come with being a member of Congress are difficult.”
Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., criticized both Gallagher and Johnson for the timing of the exit.
‘President Johnson should force Mike Gallagher to leave early so his district can hold a special election, and any strong Republican House Speaker would expel a member for leaving our slim majority in such a delicate state. We cannot allow, we cannot allow this,” Greene said Sunday on Fox News’ Sunday Morning Futures.
“Mike Gallagher betrayed us all,” Greene continued.
“And President Johnson, as the head of our majority, praised Mike Gallagher on Friday after announcing his departure, saying he’s great and thanking him for his service in Congress,” he added.
Meanwhile, the nearly 50-member Freedom Caucus expelled Rep. Ken Buck, R-Colo., from its caucus on his final day in the House after he announced he, too, would be leaving early.
Both Buck and Gallagher voted against the dismissal of the Secretary of Homeland Security. Alejandro Mayorkas.
