The government shutdown enters its fourth week on Wednesday — and Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., is adamant that he won’t reconvene the House until Senate Democrats accept his conference’s spending bill.
But one element of Johnson’s calculus may be more public relations than legislative strategy. Part of his decision to keep House Republicans at home during the standoff could be that some of the House GOP’s members — known for their colorful personalities, confrontational tactics and headline-grabbing comments — could do more harm than good with ready access to the congressional press corps.
Johnson alluded to that dynamic earlier this month when he told reporters it was “better” for Republicans and Democrats, “probably, to be physically separated right now.”
“I wish that weren’t the case, but we do have to turn the volume down,” he said.
That was the day after Sens. Mark Kelly and Ruben Gallego, both Arizona Democrats, confronted Johnson and Rep. Mike Lawler, R-N.Y., in the Capitol to press them on the shutdown and the delayed swearing-in of Rep.-elect Adelita Grijalva, D-Ariz.
Hours after that episode, Lawler went toe-to-toe with Rep. Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., as the House minority leader left a press conference in the Capitol.
And that was just one day.
Of course, the opportunity for Democrats to step on their leadership’s message is just as real. Last week, roughly a dozen members of the Democratic Women’s Caucus marched to Johnson’s Capitol suite to pressure the speaker to swear in Grijalva. But during the confrontation, Rep. Nanette Barragán, D-Calif., got into a spat with a Capitol Police officer, handing Republicans ammunition to cast Democrats as anti-law enforcement.
Either way, the disadvantages of bringing his House GOP conference back seem to be winning out for Johnson. And Senate Republicans are welcoming that decision as they try to work through the shutdown stalemate.
“I’d send them on a CODEL to the other side of the moon,” Sen. Kevin Cramer, R-N.D., said of members of the House, referring to a congressional delegation trip.
“He probably doesn’t want them here negotiating with senators or whatever,” Cramer added. “I just think they’re better off being away; they’ve done their job.”
Cramer, a former member of the House, likened the situation to having “fewer cooks in the kitchen.”
“I think they’re better not having a large House Republican contingency here while we’re negotiating with Democrats,” he said.
Sen. Shelley Moore Capito, R-W.Va., said the vivacious nature of the House “probably factored into” Johnson’s decision to keep members out of town.
“Obviously there have been some confrontations over there,” said Capito, who also served in the House before jumping to the Senate. “When there’s not enough to do, there tends to be more emotions involved.”
Sen. Markwayne Mullin, R-Okla. — yet another a former House member who is often viewed as a liaison between Republicans in both chambers — said when members have empty schedules, they can cause trouble. He supported Johnson’s decision to leave his lawmakers at home.
“They don’t have things they’re working on, then what’s the point of being up here?” Mullin asked. “If you’re just sitting in your office, you’re not having hearings, you have a tendency to create problems that aren’t needed. And I’m not saying that would happen, I’m saying it could happen.”
One Senate Republican, who requested anonymity to speak candidly on the topic, said the strategy of keeping House members out of town is two-fold: It helps keep the party’s message intact, and it prevents “squishier” lawmakers from breaking ranks.









