(Editor’s Note: The following opinion column does not constitute an endorsement of any political party or candidate on the part of Newsmax.)
U.S. House Speaker Mike Johnson folded like a feminine napkin on spending and election integrity. After losing a Sept. 18 vote on a continuing resolution with the election-cleansing SAVE Act attached, the Louisiana Republican slid into the passenger seat and left the driving to U.S. Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y.
The result?
A massive disappointment for conservatives and yet another white flag that Johnson can add to his burgeoning collection.
The stopgap spending measure that Schumer crafted, and Johnson dutifully swallowed, avoids a government shutdown, maintains current spending, and lacks the SAVE ACT, a key GOP priority that Johnson jettisoned in exchange for . . . absolutely nothing.
The Continuing Appropriations and Extensions Act also expires on Dec. 20, just in time for a Santa-style Christmas omnibus that will let the lame-duck Congress stuff its stockings with goodies paid for with taxpayer dollars and America’s exhausted Bank of China Visa card.
This fiasco will energize and delight Democrats and enrage and demoralize Republicans less than seven weeks before Election Day, and with early voting already afoot.
This will jeopardize the House’s GOP majority and tighten Democrats’ tenuous grip on the Senate. This complicates things for Donald J. Trump. Cackles of joy surely echo through Kamala Harris’s headquarters.
None of this had to happen.
If Johnson possessed a shot of courage, a little imagination, and much less lust to please Schumer, Republicans could have gotten somewhere, and certainly to a better place than where they landed.
House Republicans should have strapped Johnson to a hard chair, shined a Stasi-like 500-watt interrogation light into his face, and demanded that he do his job for once: Johnson should have mustered whatever leadership skills he had left and, at long last, called Schumer’s bluff: If Schumer wanted to shut down the government if he did not get his way, he should have done so.
Saving the SAVE Act amid a budget confrontation would have electrified Republicans rather than dim the lights on GOP prospects.
Republicans unanimously support the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility Act, which excludes foreign citizens from voting in federal elections. When it passed on July 10, all 216 Republicans assented.
Five Democrats concurred, but 198 Dems opposed American-citizen-only federal elections. (Please refer to this graph, courtesy of Tea Party Patriots and McLaughlin & Associates.)
On this issue, Republicans are squarely in sync with the American people, and Democrats are lost in space.
A Feb. 16 Tea Party Patriots poll of 1,000 general-election voters found that 87% believe "proof of United States citizenship should be required to vote in American elections." This includes 96% of Republicans, 89% of independents, and 76% of Democrats!
Meanwhile, Republicans splintered on September 18, when 14 fiscal conservatives rejected a continuing resolution with the SAVE Act but without restraints on runaway spending. Two voted “Present.”
Here’s how Johnson could have united his divided — and now betrayed — caucus:
First, redeploy the SAVE Act.
Second, add a CR that cut overall spending by 1%. Even as a first step, an actual expenditure reduction could have satisfied those 16 thrifty Republican dissenters.
Third, append House Budget Chairman Rep. Jody Arrington’s measure, which would have forced Congress to stay in Washington and “Get ’er done.”
"Why don’t we, instead of shut the government down, as the threat, shut politicians in?" the Texas Republican asked Fox News’ Maria Bartiromo on Sept. 19. "No budget, no appropriations, no recess, no go home," he continued.
"Make us stay here and get our work done, like every American family and business has to do. Put the pressure on us to act responsibly instead of what we do, year in and year out."
After passing this three-part bill, Republicans should have added a dash of stagecraft:
With this legislation in hand, Johnson and every Republican should have marched physically on the Senate.
As journalists watched, Johnson and his majority should have walked across the U.S. Capitol, met GOP leader Sen. Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., and declared: "The people’s House hereby delivers this continuing resolution. If the Senate concurs before October 1, there will be no government shutdown."
House Republicans very publicly would have done their duty to keep the government open, reduce spending, limit federal elections to American citizens, and commit themselves to shelter in place and wok hard before Fiscal Year 2024 ends.
Schumer then would have ridden the horns of a dilemma: Should he have passed this measure and sent it to President Biden to sign? Or should Schumer have made Sens. Tammy Baldwin, D-Wis., Bob Casey, D-Pa. Jacky Rosen, D-Nev., Jon Tester, D-Montana, and other Democrats facing re-election explain back home why they padlocked the government rather than squeeze one single penny from each budget dollar?
Would Schumer have made these incumbents defend suspended federal functions because Democrats wanted foreign citizens to cast ballots and cancel the votes of American citizens?
Facing constituent wrath, these Democrats might have helped Republicans pass Johnson’s bill.
These Senate votes would have been close. This could have kept Kamala pinned down in Washington, poised to break ties, rather than in swing states, dodging journalists.
This strategy would have forced a high-profile national debate on spending and foreign-citizen voting. These issues dovetailed perfectly with voters’ chief concerns: the economy and immigration.
This Republican bonanza also would have done the right thing for America.
All it needed was leadership.
Deroy Murdock is a Manhattan-based Fox News Contributor. Read Deroy Murdock's Reports — Read More Here.