Today in a surprise move, House Republicans torpedoed a rule vote for H.R.463, the bill to prohibit the use of Federal funds to ban gas stoves, marking the first time since 2013 such a procedural tactic has been used.
The vote failed 206–220 with 12 members of the GOP voting against the rule: Reps. Andy Biggs (AZ), Dan Bishop (NC), Lauren Boebert (CO), Ken Buck (CO), Tim Burchett (TN), Eli Crane (AZ), Matt Gaetz (FL), Bob Good (VA), Ralph Norman (SC), Matt Rosendale (MT), Chip Roy (TX). House Majority Leader Steve Scalise (R–LA) also voted against the rule in order to preserve his ability to bring the rule back to the floor for a vote at a later time.
According to those who voted against the rule, the “no“ votes were an act of protest launched by the 11 lawmakers to register their disapproval over how GOP leadership handled the debt deal. Further, no–voting Rep. Bishop added it was a deliberate ambush on leadership, while Rep. Burchett said he was angered about the apparent threats House Majority Leader Steve Scalise (R–LA) made to Republican Rep. Andrew Clyde (R–GA).
Clyde has a bill to repeal the ATF‘s pistol brace rule which he said would pass the House if brought to the floor for a vote, but he isn‘t sure the House GOP leaders got the message.
In response to the torpedoed rule vote, an aide to Rep. Scalise said, “The Majority Leader did not threaten anyone. It is absurd that anonymous ‘sources‘ would make these claims and attack the leader on the record. It proves what anonymous sources are often guilty of—undermining the work of Congressional Republicans and our Republican Leader.”
The failed vote serves as a reminder to GOP leadership that the members of the House are free to disagree and take a stance when necessary—and that the House Freedom Caucus cannot be ignored. However, this particular episode could also create unnecessary tension between leadership and the House Republicans going forward.
Clearly, the 11 Republicans that voted no were prepared to take this stand in order to make their voices heard on how the debt deal was handled. Whether leadership heard their message loud and clear will remain to be seen, as tense relations between the two sides may simmer even after they come to a resolution.
