Boehner Stands With Obama On Syria, But Not Too Close

The House speaker won’t whip the GOP caucus, and isn’t worried about the “Hastert Rule.”

Tea Leaves: Democrats question whether Boehner will rein in tea partiers.
National Journal
Add to Briefcase
Patrick Reis
Sept. 3, 2013, 11:16 a.m.

John Boehner has de­cided: He’ll vote to ap­prove Pres­id­ent Obama’s re­quest for au­thor­ity to launch a mil­it­ary strike against Syr­ia, but that’s about all the help he’s pre­pared to provide.

In­stead, the House speak­er is put­ting the onus on Obama, say­ing the pres­id­ent alone is re­spons­ible for win­ning the votes he needs to au­thor­ize mil­it­ary ac­tion.

“It is the pres­id­ent’s re­spons­ib­il­ity to make his case to the Amer­ic­an people and their elec­ted rep­res­ent­at­ives,” Mi­chael Steel, a spokes­man for Boehner, said Tues­day. “Every­one un­der­stands that it is an up­hill battle to pass a res­ol­u­tion, and the speak­er ex­pects the White House to provide an­swers to mem­bers’ ques­tions and take the lead on any whip­ping ef­fort.”

And while Boehner has asked his Re­pub­lic­an caucus to sup­port mil­it­ary ac­tion, he’s not mak­ing any de­mands, in­stead call­ing the de­cision a “con­science vote” for each mem­ber.

If Boehner can con­vince voters it’s Obama’s job — and not his — to win Re­pub­lic­ans to sup­port mil­it­ary ac­tion, he will have par­tially sidestepped a chal­lenge that has com­plic­ated much of his ten­ure as speak­er: cor­ralling a caucus that ranges from Re­pub­lic­an vet­er­ans to a rowdy crew of tea-party new­comers.

But re­gard­less of what his of­fice says about a Syr­ia de­cision, some of the re­spons­ib­il­ity for the out­come will land at Boehner’s feet, be­cause it’s his de­cision when to put the res­ol­u­tion to a vote. And, when it comes to Syr­ia, Boehner has no safe op­tions.

If he pushes on-the-fence Re­pub­lic­ans to sup­port Obama’s po­s­i­tion, he’ll face ac­cus­a­tions of selling out his party’s hard-liners in or­der to side with the pres­id­ent. But if he fol­lows through on his ini­tial re­fus­al to rally sup­port, Boehner risks ap­pear­ing that he has lost con­trol of his caucus, not to men­tion jeop­ard­iz­ing au­thor­iz­a­tion for a mil­it­ary strike that — by vir­tue of vot­ing “yes” — he ex­pli­citly sup­ports.

Boehner’s vote alone is no guar­an­tee of Re­pub­lic­an sup­port, as the speak­er has fallen vic­tim to caucus re­volts be­fore. Boehner was left red-faced in June when a ver­sion of the farm bill failed after 62 Re­pub­lic­ans voted against it.

And mem­bers of his caucus are already speak­ing out against Obama’s re­quest. Flor­ida’s Ted Yoho on Tues­day said more evid­ence is needed to jus­ti­fy a strike, and Michigan’s Justin Amash — a per­petu­al thorn in Boehner’s side — has spent the day tweet­ing about how his con­stitu­ents over­whelm­ing op­pose U.S. mil­it­ary en­gage­ment in Syr­ia.

If a strike has sup­port from a ma­jor­ity of the House but is op­posed by a ma­jor­ity of Re­pub­lic­ans, Boehner will have to de­cide wheth­er to abide by the so-called Hastert Rule — an in­form­al policy that calls on the speak­er to only al­low floor votes on bills that are sup­por­ted by the ma­jor­ity of his caucus.

But a seni­or House lead­er­ship aide said he “couldn’t ima­gine” the Hastert Rule be­com­ing an is­sue, as both Re­pub­lic­an sup­port­ers and op­pon­ents of mil­it­ary ac­tion have de­man­ded a chance to vote on it.


Welcome to National Journal!

You are currently accessing National Journal from IP access. Please login to access this feature. If you have any questions, please contact your Dedicated Advisor.