Speaker Paul Ryan has promised a more inclusive House and a less divided Republican Party. One of his first steps toward achieving that? More meetings.
Ryan has called for a weekly huddle to discuss the issues of the day among some of the House Republicans’ most influential caucuses—the centrist Tuesday Group, the conservative House Freedom Caucus, and the Republican Study Committee, the largest GOP caucus.
“Speaker Ryan believes the conference is strongest when it’s unified. To have a more inclusive speakership, he has pulled together a group of members representing the major Republican caucuses,” Ryan spokeswoman AshLee Strong said.
The weekly lunch meeting will start the week after next and include representatives from leadership as well as each group: Freedom Caucus Chairman Jim Jordan, RSC Chairman Bill Flores, and Tuesday Group Chairman Charlie Dent, or one of their lieutenants. They will also include influential members from around the conference, including some of Ryan’s most trusted hands, such as Financial Services Committee Chairman Jeb Hensarling, Budget Committee Chairman Tom Price, and Rep. Kristi Noem, vice chairwoman of the Republican Women’s Policy Committee. The meetings could include more members.
“The thinking is, we can prehash these problems out before they go to committee or come to the floor then we can have better outcomes,” Flores said. “If the RSC is promoting something legislatively and the Tuesday Group is having a problem with it, Charlie and I can look each other in the eye and say, ‘Hey, let’s find the 80 percent we agree on and figure out how we deal with the 20 percent we don’t.’”
The meetings could have a corollary benefit: preventing the kinds of public blowups between Republican moderates and conservatives that have marred the past several years.
The meetings come after late last month, ahead of Ryan’s election as speaker, members of the Freedom Caucus and Tuesday Group met behind closed doors to start a dialogue and discuss procedural reforms that members have been seeking.
What We're Following See More »
The indictment, filed in the District of Columbia, alleges that the interference began "in or around 2014," when the defendants began tracking and studying U.S. social media sites. They "created and controlled numerous Twitter accounts" and "purchased computer servers located inside the United States" to mask their identities, some of which were stolen. The interference was coordinated by election interference "specialists," and focused on the Black Lives Matter movement, immigration, and other divisive issues. "By early to mid-2016" the groups began supporting the campaign of "then-candidate Donald Trump," including by communicating with "unwitting individuals associated with the Trump Campaign..."
"Former Trump campaign adviser Rick Gates is finalizing a plea deal with special counsel Robert Mueller's office, indicating he's poised to cooperate in the investigation, according to sources familiar with the case. Gates has already spoken to Mueller's team about his case and has been in plea negotiations for about a month. He's had what criminal lawyers call a 'Queen for a Day' interview, in which a defendant answers any questions from the prosecutors' team, including about his own case and other potential criminal activity he witnessed."
"The Senate on Thursday rejected immigration legislation crafted by centrists in both parties after President Trump threatened to veto the bill if it made it to his desk. In a 54-45 vote, the Senate failed to advance the legislation from eight Republican, seven Democratic and one Independent senators. It needed 60 votes to overcome a procedural hurdle. "
"The House Intelligence Committee has scheduled a Thursday meeting to hear testimony from Steve Bannon—but it's an open question whether President Donald Trump's former chief strategist will even show up. The White House sent a letter to Capitol Hill late Wednesday laying out its explanation for why Trump's transition period falls under its authority to assert executive privilege, a move intended to shield Bannon from answering questions about that time period." Both Republicans and Democrats on the committee dispute the White House's theory, and have floated charging Bannon with contempt should he refuse to appear.