Ahead of this week’s final vote on the Republican Party’s massive reconciliation package — the poorly named “One Big Beautiful Bill Act” — House Speaker Mike Johnson faced a seemingly impossible challenge. If the Louisiana Republican moved the bill toward the center, he’d lose support from his far-right flank in the House Freedom Caucus. If he pushed the legislation further to the right, he risked losing votes from the party’s so-called “moderate” wing.

With a small majority in the chamber and little margin for error, the House speaker faced a riddle without an obvious answer — that is, until Johnson chose the course that, in hindsight, was the obvious call.

The GOP leader struck backroom deals with his most right-wing members, made the bill even more punitive and regressive, and told his party’s “centrists” to simply vote for it anyway.

And they did.

As the process unfolded over the course of several months, Republicans from competitive districts — including districts that Joe Biden won in 2020 and Kamala Harris won in 2024 — focused on a couple of core priorities: preventing deep Medicaid cuts and preserving clean energy investments. On Wednesday night, with just hours remaining before the bill reached the House floor for a vote, the House speaker told his so-called “moderate” members that he was moving forward with a bill that largely ignored their concerns. Politico reported roughly nine hours before the vote:

A key moderate Republican is balking over the [Inflation Reduction Act] piece of the megabill after getting briefed on changes made to placate conservatives. Rep. Andrew Garbarino (R-NY) said he’s “not happy” with the changes to the IRA tax credits and wouldn’t commit his vote as GOP leaders race toward a potential floor vote as soon as tonight. “I think these things I’m hearing could end up killing a lot of projects that have been announced all over the country,” he told reporters after huddling with other moderates in Speaker Mike Johnson’s office.

Soon after, Garbarino, despite feeling “not happy” with his party’s last-minute, far-right changes, endorsed the bill anyway. How many of his “moderate” colleagues did the same thing, voting for the legislation after their party’s leaders blew off their concerns and priorities? Literally all of them. The group included Republican Rep. Mike Lawler of New York, who also expressed doubts before ultimately backing the package.

Johnson catered to the House Freedom Caucus members because he assumed they’d follow through on their threats and derail the bill. Johnson snubbed the ostensible “centrists” because he assumed they’d cave and do what they were told.

The speaker’s assumption was, we know now, entirely correct.

This was a predictable outcome because it keeps happening. In every tough vote this year, “moderates” grumbled a bit, shortly before they linked arms with their conservative brethren and toed the party line.

Recommended

Maddowblog

Speaker Mike Johnson’s July 4 gift to Trump reflected the president’s growing power

Steve Benen

Maddowblog

‘My kids could die’: Speaker Mike Johnson confronted by Republican voter on C-SPAN

Steve Benen

A couple of years ago, an unnamed GOP lawmaker told an NBC News reporter, “Moderates always cave. A tale as old as time.” That’s largely true, though it also raises related questions that are too often overlooked: If “moderates” effectively always vote the same way as their far-right colleagues, then are they actually “moderates”? Or does it make more sense for the political world to pause, reassess and come to terms with the apparent fact that there are no actual Republican moderates on Capitol Hill?

I’m reminded of a point The Atlantic’s Jon Chait made in 2023, when he was still at New York magazine:

“Moderate” Republicans, as the media has absurdly taken to labeling conservative Republicans who have qualms about seizing power through non-electoral means, have shown through the last few weeks precisely how serious they are about their principles. They are willing to fight for them, for a short period of time, before arriving at the same position as their right-wing coalition partners.

That assessment remains valid two years later.

What’s especially striking about this dynamic is that these Republicans actually have incredible leverage, especially in light of the party’s tiny majority. What’s more, they have a very compelling excuse they can bring to Johnson and other party leaders: As the prevailing political winds start to turn against Republicans, and with historical trends favoring Democrats next year, these GOP members from competitive districts can plausibly tell their own party, “Look, if I go along with a radical, far-right agenda, I’ll lose; Democrats will take my seat; and we’ll end up in the minority.”

But they don’t use that leverage — perhaps because they’re too weak, perhaps because they’re too scared, or because their genuine political beliefs aren’t nearly as “centrist” as they like to pretend.