Marjorie Taylor Greene Files Motion to Oust Speaker Johnson

Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) has formally moved to oust House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) from his leadership role in frustration over a $1.2 trillion spending package Congress is working to pass today to avoid a shutdown.

Ms. Greene filed the motion to vacate on March 22 as members of the House voted to fund the remaining 70 percent of the federal government through the rest of the fiscal year.

The funding package, comprising six appropriations bills, was introduced in the wee hours of March 21—just one day ahead of the deadline to avoid a partial government shutdown. Despite fierce opposition from roughly half of the GOP conference, the measure passed under a suspension of the rules in a 286–134 vote.

“This is a betrayal of the American people. This is a betrayal of the Republican voters,” the congresswoman told reporters outside of the Capitol following the vote.

While noting that she was not alone in thinking it was time for a leadership change, Ms. Greene stressed that her purpose in filing the motion was not to “throw the House into chaos.”

“Committees will continue doing their work, investigations will continue. … I support Republicans holding the majority next conference, but we need a speaker of the House that knows how to negotiate, knows how to walk in the room, knows how to hold the line, and knows how to defend America first and the values and the policies that President Trump will bring.”

The tumultuous weeks following former speaker and Rep. Kevin McCarthy’s (R-Calif.) toppling last September were fraught with uncertainty in the House. Without a chair, no legislative work could be conducted, and the GOP infighting in selecting a new speaker threatened to tear the party apart.

In this case, Ms. Greene said her motion was “more of a warning and a pink slip” and that it will only be voted on if she brings it to the floor.

“This is not personal against Mike Johnson,” she noted. “He’s a very good man and I have respect for him as a person, but he is not doing the job. The proof is in the vote count today.”

The Epoch Times has reached out to Mr. Johnson’s office for comment.

‘Abomination of a Bill’

Ms. Greene had teased a potential motion to vacate earlier in the day during an appearance on Steve Bannon’s “War Room.”

Asked if she was considering the move, she told Mr. Bannon: “I think you can stay tuned.”

The congresswoman later took to the House floor to reiterate her frustration with Mr. Johnson, stating that he should not bring the appropriations package up for a vote.

“It is the will of our voters and it is the will of Republicans across the country that this bill should not be brought to the floor, that this bill will absolutely destroy our majority and will tell every single one of our voters that this majority is a failure,” she said.

Although two-thirds of the House later voted to pass the appropriations minibus, it was without the support of a majority of Republicans.

In the days and hours leading up to the vote, members of the staunchly conservative House Freedom Caucus pleaded with their fellow Republicans to reject the measure. The bill, they charged, would fund all the Biden administration policies they’d been fighting against.

“This is business as usual in the swamp. And here’s the deal to my Republican colleagues: You will own every single bit of this. If you vote for this bill, you own it,” Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas) said on the House floor before the vote.

“You could end what happened yesterday in Texas, where a hundred illegal aliens bum rushed our border, rolled over the Texas National Guard, fled into this country, went to Border Patrol to get released into the United States. That is what this bill continues to fund,” he continued.

“And any of my Republican colleagues who want to spend this year campaigning against open borders—it’s a laugh. Because today, if you vote for this abomination of a bill, you will be voting to fund it.”

Border security was a major point of contention for Republicans during the negotiations process as funding for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is included in the spending package.

Would it Work?

As was the case with Mr. McCarthy, just one member is needed to prompt a vote on Mr. Johnson’s removal.

Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.), the lawmaker with the most responsibility for Mr. McCarthy’s removal, said on March 21 that he doesn’t want to see Mr. Johnson go.

Mr. Gaetz acknowledged the similarities between Mr. Johnson and Mr. McCarthy on spending but cited several differences between the two in other areas, including the House’s subpoena of first son Hunter Biden and passing articles of impeachment against DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas.

He suggested that many of Mr. Johnson’s faults are driven by moderate Republicans willing to join Democrats on spending issues, and said the solution, rather than giving Mr. Johnson the boot, is to “elect a better batch of Republicans.”

Rep. Tim Burchett (R-Tenn.), another lawmaker who voted to oust Mr. McCarthy, condemned the minibus as “a pile of garbage” and acknowledged that Mr. Johnson “is responsible for this package, ultimately.” But he rebuffed suggestions of another power struggle within the House GOP.

Asked by a reporter whether there would be “consequences” for Mr. Johnson’s deal with the Democrats, Mr. Burchett said, “There’s always gonna be consequences.”

But, he said, “If we were to kick him out, you might as well just give the gavel to Hakeem”—referring to House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.).

He mentioned that there is some discussion behind the scenes of booting Mr. Johnson out, but dismissed this, saying, “They’re always talking about it but they’re not stepping up to do it.”

Several of the ones talking tough, he said, were only doing so due to pushback from constituents for not joining in on Mr. McCarthy’s ouster.

Rep. Eli Crane (R-Ariz.), who also voted to remove Mr. McCarthy, echoed Mr. Burchett, striking a conciliatory and understanding tone toward the embattled speaker.

While acknowledging that the buck stops with Mr. Johnson, Mr. Crane said, “We’ve also got to be realistic and look at the situation.”

He emphasized that he wouldn’t support a motion to vacate against Mr. Johnson at the present time.

“I’m glad that we did what we did,” Mr. Crane said. “At the very least … Speaker Johnson is transparent and, you know, doesn’t make promises and then not deliver on those promises.”

Mr. Crane cited the shrinking Republican majority in the House as part of the reasoning for his much more understanding approach to Mr. Johnson’s speakership.

Still, Mr. Crane said he wouldn’t have faith in Mr. Johnson “until I see him start playing to win.”

Rep. Dan Bishop (R-N.C.), who voted to keep Mr. McCarthy in but nonetheless skews toward the right-wing of the party, also said he doesn’t want to see Mr. Johnson ousted—and suggested there isn’t much discussion of the move within the party.

Asked whether Mr. Johnson is at risk, Mr. Bishop replied, “I mean, not for me, and I don’t hear talk about that. I don’t think that sentiment exists at this point.”

But he did say Mr. Johnson might fail to win enough support to reclaim the mantle during the next Republican majority House.

“I think he needs something dramatic that indicates he’s capable of putting his speakership on the line for change that Americans want [and] need,” Mr. Bishop said.

Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas), who voted against removing Mr. McCarthy but who blasted Mr. Johnson for the minibus, also said he isn’t thinking about a motion to vacate for the time being.

“I’m not going to go down that road right now,” he said during a March 21 interview on Fox News’ “Your World.”

Mr. Johnson could still face a challenge, as several Republicans have grown increasingly frustrated with his management of the lower chamber. But having their backing—even if reluctantly—is a good indicator that his job is probably safe for now.

Jacob Burg contributed to this report.