WASHINGTON — When Republicans took control of the House in 2010, they knew their new majority would be a challenge to control. The new generation of Republicans cared little for compromise or the institution’s traditions, and even less for anyone they viewed as accommodating to President Obama.
Fueled by the fires of the Tea Party and general anxiety over the economy, endless wars, and the looming start of Obamacare, the new generation was in no mood for slow and steady approach of political elders. It was a calculated risk for Republicans, who after four years in the minority with a brand deeply scarred by Bush-era overspending, scandals, and missteps, desperately needed an injection of energy.
Initially, Speaker John Boehner seemed the perfect person to bridge the gap between the two sides: while an institutionalist, he’d been cast into the wilderness in 1997 after a failed coup against then-Speaker Newt Gingrich. And although Boehner was committed to compromise, he had solid social conservative bona fides and was leading the charge against the practice of earmarks.
But it became clear almost immediately that these new Republicans weren’t going to be easily tamed. Within months of taking the gavel, Boehner was struggling to keep his conference from forcing a government shutdown in the Spring of 2011.
Still, Boehner and his team would insist repeatedly over the next three years that if they could just educate their conference a little more and convince them that the political realities of divided government limited their options, the next potential crisis would be averted.
But instead of reining in conservatives, Boehner’s handling of the conference only seemed to embolden them. In 2012, a handful of Republicans openly opposed his bid to be re-elected speaker. Although he won, Boehner was weakened, and a government shutdown in 2013 led by Sen. Ted Cruz only served to further embolden his critics.
At the same time, the ranks of the old guard continued to shrink, as Republicans unwilling to toe the new stridently conservative line were either primaried out of office or simply retired in frustration.
By the time the new Congress convened in January, most of the country club set had been purged, and Boehner was left with a small, but loud faction of ideological purists on one hand and a pool of incumbent rank and filers whose chief concern had increasingly become avoiding a primary at all costs — even if it meant bucking leadership.
If Boehner represented a bridge between old guard Reagan Republicans and the upstart hardline conservatives, his resignation is an acknowledgement that the not only has the bridge been crossed, it’s been lit on fire.
“Crazies have taken over the party,” Rep. Peter King, an old line Republican and Boehner ally, told CNN’s Dana Bash Thursday.
For their part, Boehner’s critics were jubilant.
“Today the establishment lost,” Rep. Tim Huelskamp tweeted gleefully following Boehner’s announcement on Friday. Huelskamp, a hardline conservative and consistent thorn in Boehner’s side, was stripped of his committee assignments by leadership in part because of his hostility to Boehner.
If Boehner’s critics are guilty of not learning the ins and outs of legislating, Boehner and his team are equally guilty of not acknowledging the political realities they faced.
For most of the last two years, Boehner’s aides have insisted the repeated challenges to his power are the insane ravings of a vocal minority, and that the vast majority of his conference would do the “right” thing and back the speaker.
Even as late as Wednesday, Boehner’s spokesman Kevin Smith was adamant that the speaker was safe.
“If there’s a small crew of members who think that he’s just going to pick up and resign in the middle of his term, they are going to be sadly mistaken,” Smith told Time’s Jay Newton Small Wednesday — even as his boss was deciding to retire.