If you find a job you love, they say, you’ll never work a day in your life.
To which a cynic might quip: And if that fails, find a job serving in the House of Representatives—and the effect will be pretty much the same.
The House will come in on Wednesday next week, because leadership canceled Tuesday votes following a weeklong Memorial Day recess. The extra day out may not seem like a lot, but it’s become something of a trend: The chamber has already canceled 10 legislative days, out of its scheduled 60, so far this year. And it’s not for a lack of things to do (see: immigration debates, economic uncertainty, and a war with Iran).
Last year was even starker. Speaker
Johnson’s rationale was that House Republicans had already done their job of funding the government while Senate Democrats acted as obstructionists. But the 52-day recess became something of a spectacle as lawmakers lingered in their districts without conducting hearings, markups, or votes.
To be fair, when the House is in session, its workdays can be grueling. Lawmakers worked literally overnight to pass President Donald Trump’s tax-and-spending megabill last summer. The actual voting schedule, though, has narrowed considerably from House leaders’ goals for the 119th Congress.
It’s not accidental. Canceling votes is, save for unexpected scheduling changes like high-profile funerals, a leadership strategy.
By canceling votes during last year’s shutdown, Johnson played hardball with the Senate, telegraphing that his chamber would not accept any funding deal other than the one they already passed. He also kept his members safe from the swarms of DC political reporters (like me) who lurk in the halls of the Capitol, armed with questions that lawmakers might not want to answer. (Like: What are you doing to end the longest shutdown in US history?).
The maneuver still effectively sidelined House members—at least rank-and-file ones—from negotiations on how to fund the government. And sure enough, when a bipartisan deal was struck, it emerged from the Senate.
But the question that could haunt Johnson’s future political career is: Is such a strategy an inspiring, or even a particularly good, one?
Next Tuesday’s vote cancellation seems innocuous at first glance. Multiple states, including California and Iowa, are holding primary elections that night, which means lawmakers of both parties will want to be in their districts campaigning until the polls close. Johnson would be looking at massive absences if he held votes Tuesday night.
And yet, it’s an inherently political decision, too. Because once the House is back and voting, leaders will be forced to finally hold a vote on Democrats’ latest Iran war powers resolution. GOP leaders delayed that vote before recess, as absences and likely Republican defections threatened to propel the rebuke of Trump’s overseas war to victory. Once the House officially returns, Republican leaders are pretty much out of delay tactics.
Johnson would undoubtedly take issue with the implication that lawmakers aren’t working when they’re on recess. He’s fond of reminding reporters that the House doesn’t have recesses; it has “district work periods” for members of Congress to do constituent work and campaign at home.
Nonetheless, if you asked an average voter what they elected their congressmember to do, I’d bet they’d at least mention representing the district in Washington, DC. So you could see why constituents might question the extended periods away from Washington.
The speaker hasn’t fielded too much intraparty flak during the past year, at least compared to his ousted predecessor
It’s too soon to say if the lax calendar could impact House Republicans in November. GOP leaders insist they’re in a good position to maintain control of the House, but so do Democrats, and the president’s party usually loses congressional seats in midterms.
If the House flips, Johnson will have to decide whether he wants to stay on as minority leader, and, perhaps more importantly, whether the members of his conference want him to. And in an assessment of Johnson’s leadership skills, some House Republicans could find themselves asking:
Should we have spent a little more time in DC?