5 minPolitics
House panel advances anti-socialism resolution as Democrats cry foul
The House Rules Committee advanced a Republican resolution condemning socialism on Monday, setting up a floor vote this week. Democrats criticized the measure as a distraction, and tensions flared over the definition of socialism.
House Republicans are moving forward with a pair of measures this week designed to force Democrats to take a public stance on issues that have divided the party, starting with a resolution condemning socialism that cleared the House Rules Committee on Monday.
The committee advanced the non-binding resolution along party lines, with no Democrats voting in favor. During the hearing, Democrats dismissed the measure as a political stunt. Rep. Jim McGovern, D-Mass., called the bill “nonsense” and argued it did nothing to address the concerns of ordinary Americans.
“So you’re concerned about rising gas, or are you concerned about grocery prices? You know, don’t worry. Republicans in Congress are passing another non-binding resolution condemning socialism,” McGovern said.
Tensions escalated when Rep. Joe Neguse, D-Colo., pressed Committee on House Administration Chairman Bryan Steil, R-Wis., on how he would define socialism. Neguse asked whether Steil would view President Donald Trump taking a “20% stake” in Kroger grocery stores as socialism. Steil replied that he would “want to see the details,” prompting a heated exchange.
“Oh, you’d want to see the details,” Neguse said, raising his voice as the two spoke over each other. “You said if the government owns grocery stores, that would be socialist. But if, of course, Donald Trump were to announce an equity stake in a grocery store, well, ‘I’d have to really see the details,’ because we all know the play.”
Steil responded that he would consider such a proposal if it involved a national security imperative, but he repeatedly noted that Neguse was posing a hypothetical. At one point, Rules Committee Chairwoman Virginia Foxx, R-N.C., admonished Neguse for interrupting Steil.
“Some folks on your side of the aisle would like to have government-run grocery stores. I think that’s nuts,” Steil said.
Neguse continued pressing, asking what would happen if the president announced the government was taking an equity stake in grocery stores. Steil said there would need to be a national security rationale, adding, “I don’t see any in your hypothetical.” Neguse called that a “helpful answer,” to which Steil quipped, “It’s a hypothetical. So we’re entering silly season.”
The resolution is scheduled for a rule vote on Tuesday afternoon, followed by a vote on the resolution itself Tuesday evening, according to a provisional schedule. Republicans are also expected to bring up a constitutional amendment to cap the number of Supreme Court justices at nine, with a vote planned for Wednesday afternoon.
House GOP Conference Chair Lisa McClain, R-Mich., framed the measures as an effort to put Democrats on the record. “It’s time for the Democrats to pick a side. Stop playing the middle. Be proud of who you are. You were elected to lead, so lead. Have an opinion. We intend to put you on record,” she said. “Do you want to pack the Supreme Court or not? It’s really simple. It’s a yes or no vote. It’s no bigger than that. Two — do you believe in socialism? If you do, you should say it loud and say it proud.”
House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., declined to say whether he supports the anti-socialism resolution, instead linking it to the Safeguarding American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act, which the resolution also praises. “I haven’t taken a look at that resolution, although it’s my understanding that the resolution elevates the so-called SAVE America Act, which is just the ‘Suppress the Vote Act,’” Jeffries told reporters.
The resolution condemns socialism and hails Republican-backed election security measures as “common-sense election integrity measures, including proof of citizenship, photo identification, and database checks.” It calls for enforcement of the SAVE Act, which passed the House but has not been taken up in the Senate. Democrats have largely criticized that legislation as voter suppression. Rep. Mary Gay Scanlon, D-Pa., said the bill was an attempt to “silence political opponents.”
