After the battle over Kevin McCarthy’s ascension to Speaker of the House concluded, there was concern that the deal struck to satisfy the holdouts might end up being opposed by Republicans on the other end of the caucus. Sure enough, we are getting our first signs of opposition.
Rep. Nancy Mace (R-SC) appeared with Margaret Brennan (click here for a taste of her bias) and was asked whether she would vote for the rules package that was agreed to. Her answer exemplified Republican idiocy that too often rears its head.
I know there are those on the right that despise Mace, but I’m more agnostic about her. Like with most Republicans (because almost none are perfect), there are areas I don’t agree with her, but certainly, there are areas of common ground as well. With that said, what she’s saying here is really, really dumb and counterproductive.
If you watch the clip, Mace actually praises the rules package as the most “open, fair, and fiscally conservative package in 30 years.” Yet, she then goes on to decry that it was garnered via “backroom deals” in order to secure votes for McCarthy, and because of that, she’s now on the fence about voting for it.
Does that make sense to anyone reading this? Because it makes none at all to me. She admits that the rules package is excellent and is a generational win for conservatives…and then says she may not vote for it because she doesn’t like how it was formulated? I find that to be absolutely ridiculous. Who cares how the steak was cooked if it tastes great? Take the win, Nancy.
Look, I get that she’s not a fan of the 20 Republicans who held up the process, but without those holdouts, Mace doesn’t get the stinking rules package she is now praising. Does she really not understand that, and is she really willing to flush a major victory down the toilet for no other reason than spite? How is she acting any different than those she’s been criticizing?
Democracy is messy, and the House is purely that. It is not designed to be an institution where powerful elites dictate to the membership. Mace should recognize that in deciding how she’ll vote on the rules package. Yes, the process was chaotic and not everyone fell in line. So what? That’s how it’s supposed to work, and that’s why such a great rules package now exists to vote on. Voting against it out of some misguided attempt to punish her colleagues for thinking for themselves would be silly. Hopefully, she’s not seriously considering that.
