Politics
The Speaker’s Lobby: The Hitchhiker’s Guide to Electing a House Speaker
The Constitution dictates that the 119th Congress begins at noon et on Friday.
And the first order of business in the House is to elect the Constitutional officer for the legislative branch of government: Speaker of the House.
Only the House votes for Speaker. And the House can’t do anything – I’ll repeat that, anything – until it chooses a Speaker.
It can’t swear-in Members until the House taps a Speaker and he or she is sworn-in. The Speaker then swears-in the rest of the body, en masse. Then the House must adopt a rules package to govern daily operations. Only then can the House go about debating bills, voting and constructing committees for hearings.
HEALTHY LIVING, PARTY UNITY, ‘SMELLING THE ROSES’: CAPITOL HILL’S NEW YEAR’S RESOLUTIONS
If the House fails to elect a Speaker on the first ballot, it must proceed to a second ballot.
And on and on.
Consider for a moment that the House had never even taken a second vote for Speaker in a century before the donnybrook two years ago. It took four ballots to re-elect late House Speaker Frederick Gillett, R-Mass., in 1923.
What is past is prologue for the House. Consider how the House consumed 15 rounds spread out over five days before electing former House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., in January, 2023. The Speakership remained vacant – and thus, the House frozen – for 22 days after Republicans dumped McCarthy nine months later. House Republicans then tapped House Majority Leader Steve Scalise, R-La., for Speaker. Scalise withdrew his name before there was even a floor vote. House GOPers then tapped Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, to become Speaker. But Jordan lost three consecutive votes for Speaker on the House floor, bleeding support on each ballot. House Republicans then anointed House Majority Whip Tom Emmer, R-Minn., for Speaker. Emmer withdrew hours later.
Fox News Digital briefly spoke with ex-Speaker Kevin McCarthy during a rare appearance on Capitol Hill
House Republicans finally nominated House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., for the job. The Louisiana Republican won on the floor. But some conservatives have been disappointed in Johnson ever since. They’ve flagged how he handled multiple, interim spending bills from last November on. They didn’t like that he allowed a bill on the floor to aid Ukraine. They opposed him doing yet another interim spending bill in September. They really didn’t like how he worked with Democrats on major, must-do pieces of legislation. And then there was the misstep of the staggering, 1,500-page interim spending package which Mr. Trump and Elon Musk pulverized from afar in December. Johnson then did President-elect Trump’s bidding with another spending package – which included a debt ceiling increase. But 38 House Republicans bolted on that bill.
So Johnson’s tenure has been bumpy. And that’s why he’s on the hook come Friday afternoon during the vote for Speaker. Everyone on Capitol Hill is on tenterhooks when it comes to wrapping this up expeditiously.
Here’s what will happen Friday at noon:
REPUBLICAN CONGRESSMAN CALLS ON INCOMING ADMINISTRATION TO TARGET ‘THE AXIS OF AGGRESSORS’
Acting House Clerk Kevin McCumber will preside until the House elects a Speaker. The first order of business is a “call of the House.” That’s where the House establishes how many of its Members-elect are there, simply voting “present.” The House should clock in at 434 members: 219 Republicans and 215 Democrats. There should be one vacancy. Former Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., resigned in the fall – and said he did not “intend” to serve in the new Congress, despite having won reelection.
Watch to see if there are absences in that call of the House. Fox is told that Democrats who have struggled with health issues of late – including Reps. Raul Grijalva, D-Ariz., Dwight Evans, D-Penn., and former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., will likely be there. But the Speaker’s election is about the math. How many lawmakers report to the House chamber will dictate margins in the Speaker’s vote.
Then it’s on to nominating speeches. Incoming House Republican Conference Chairwoman Lisa McClain, R-Mich., will nominate Johnson for Speaker. House Democratic Caucus Chairman Pete Aguilar, D-Calif., will nominate House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y. Anyone else can then place someone’s name in nomination.
Then, the House calls the roll of Members-elect alphabetically. Each Member rises and verbally responds, calling out their choice by name. Reps. Alma Adams, D-N.C., Robert Aderholt, R-Ala., and the aforementioned Aguilar are the first names out of the block.
(Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)
But lawmakers can vote for anyone they want. That includes persons who aren’t House Members. That’s why there have been votes cast over the years for the late Gen. Colin Powell, Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., former Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., and former U.S. Comptroller General David Walker.
This is what Johnson – or anyone else must do – to win the Speakership:
The winning candidate must secure an outright majority of all Members voting for a candidate by name.
So let’s say there are 434 members and all vote for someone by name. The magic number is 218. If Johnson gets the votes of all 219 Republicans, he wins. If Johnson gets 218 votes, he also wins. But 217? No dice. Under those circumstances Johnson would have prospectively outpolled Jeffries, 217-215 – with two votes going to other candidates. But the “most votes” doesn’t win. 217 is not an outright majority of House Members voting for someone by name. The House must take ANOTHER ballot to elect a Speaker.
Fox is told there are anywhere from 12 to 17 Republicans who could vote for someone besides Johnson. And some Republicans are being cagey about their votes.
BERNIE SANDERS PLANS TO SPEARHEAD LEGISLATION ON KEY TRUMP PROPOSAL
Here’s something to watch: Members who vote “present.”
Rather than voting for someone besides Johnson, some Republicans may protest by simply voting “present.” A “present” vote does not count against Johnson.
So let’s do some hypothetical math here:
Let’s say 434 Members cast ballots. Jeffries secures support from all 215 Democrats. Three Republicans vote “present.” In other words, not voting for any candidate by name. Johnson scores 216 votes. He has the most votes. But more importantly, only 431 Members voted for someone by name. 216 is an outright majority of 431. 434 doesn’t matter under these circumstances. So Johnson becomes Speaker.
But there is serious danger in too many Republicans voting “present.”
Consider this scenario:
All 215 Democrats vote for Jeffries. But five Republicans vote “present.” Johnson records 214 votes. 429 Members cast ballots for someone by name. The magic number here is 215. Guess who’s Speaker? Jeffries. He marshalled an outright majority of all Members voting for a candidate by name.
(Joe Raedle/Getty Images)
As they say in the movies, “You play a very dangerous game, Mr. Bond.”
With such a thin margin in the House, Republicans are absolutely tinkering with fire if they get too cute by half. Yes. Some conservatives might not want to re-elect Johnson as Speaker. But they certainly don’t want Jeffries.
So it’s hard to say what happens on Friday afternoon. If the House dithers too long, this could delay the certification of the Electoral College vote on Monday. The House and Senate must meet in a Joint Session of Congress on January 6 to certify the election results. No House Speaker? No Joint Session.
But something else will likely unfold if this drags on. Johnson loyalists and mainstream Republicans have had it with right-wing ideologues, the Freedom Caucus and other freelancers. Expect a full-on brawl between those two factions if Republicans struggle to elect a Speaker.
And as we wrote earlier, what is past is prologue.
A protracted battle over the Speakership serves as prologue to the looming, internecine fights among Republicans when it comes to governing. That’s to say nothing of implementing a solitary plank of President-elect Trump’s agenda.
Politics
Video: Marco Rubio Asserts Control Over Venezuela’s Budget
new video loaded: Marco Rubio Asserts Control Over Venezuela’s Budget
transcript
transcript
Marco Rubio Asserts Control Over Venezuela’s Budget
During a hearing on Venezuela on Wednesday, Secretary of State Marco Rubio shared the Trump administration’s plan to control Venezuela’s spending. Lawmakers shared concerns with Mr. Rubio that Congress was not consulted on the military operation before it happened.
-
“A short-term mechanism. This is not going to be the permanent mechanism, but this is a short-term mechanism in which the needs of the Venezuelan people can be met through a process that we’ve created, where they will submit every month a budget of ‘this is what we need’ funded. We will provide for them at the front end what that money cannot be used for. The president never rules out his options as commander in chief to protect the national interest of the United States. I can tell you right now with full certainty, we are not postured to, nor do we intend or expect to have to take any military action in Venezuela at any time. The only military presence you will see in Venezuela is our Marine guards at an embassy. One thing is for me to pick up the phone and talk to Delcy Rodríguez three times a week. Another thing is to have someone on the ground on a daily basis that’s following these events, is talking to civil society, but also engaging with interim authorities.” “I am worried that the very foundations of trust are being shaken. Our democracy depends on consultation with Congress that is truthful and timely, and the confidence of our allies depends on them knowing where we’re going next.” “And I’m often struggling to get briefings, clear information or meaningful cooperation from the administration and the State Department.”
By Jorge Mitssunaga
January 28, 2026
Politics
Trump return to Iowa likely ahead of high-stakes midterms, GOP gubernatorial candidate says
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
President Donald Trump’s campaign blitz to help Republicans in the 2026 midterm elections will bring him back to Iowa just a few months before the November races take place, a Republican gubernatorial hopeful there said.
Rep. Randy Feenstra, R-Iowa, was one of several House Republicans traveling with the president during his latest stop in the Hawkeye State on Tuesday, which Trump capped off with a rally-style speech in Clive in the late afternoon. The conservative Republican is also the frontrunner in the Republican gubernatorial primary there, and is expected to face off against Democrat state official Rob Sand in November.
“He’s coming back. So we have the 250th anniversary — that’s going to be at the state fair. He’s come down for that. We’re going to have a big bash, it’s going to be exciting. That’s gonna be a big deal,” Feenstra told Fox News Digital on Wednesday. “Hopefully he comes back a few more times.”
The Iowa State Fair will take place in Des Moines from Aug. 13 to 23, according to the event’s website.
SEN TIM SCOTT: REPUBLICANS JUST GETTING STARTED, BUT NEED TIME TO STOP RADICAL LEFTISTS
Left: Then-candidate and former President Donald Trump at a campaign rally, Jan. 5, 2024, in Mason City, Iowa. Right: Iowa Republican Rep. Randy Feenstra, gubernatorial candidate, speaks during Iowa’s Roast and Ride, Oct. 11, 2025, at the Iowa State Fairgrounds. (Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images; Cody Scanlan/The Register/USA Today Network via Imagn Images)
That’s roughly three months ahead of what’s expected to be a tough midterm season for Republicans across the country. History dictates that the president’s party normally suffers political setbacks during the election cycle two years after power changes hands.
Meanwhile, Democrats across the country have fallen back into positioning Trump as a divisive political boogeyman. But Feenstra argued the opposite, and said Trump’s effort to stay active during the election cycle will “absolutely” benefit Republicans.
TRUMP SAYS DEMOCRATS ARE ‘MEANER’ THAN REPUBLICANS, WARNS OF IMPEACHMENT IF GOP LOSES MIDTERMS
President Donald Trump speaks to guests as he visits the Machine Shed restaurant, Jan. 27, 2026, in Urbandale, Iowa. (Win McNamee/Getty Images)
“He carried Iowa by 13 points, and him engaging and stimulating the base — I mean, he turns out voters like nobody else. He had 77 million Americans that voted for him in the last election talking about making America great again. Now he’s talking about lowering prices, making things more affordable,” Feenstra said.
“He’s lowered the price on gas, he lowered the price on eggs, he’s lowered the price on a lot of pharmaceuticals. He’s lowered the price on healthcare. I mean, people are going to get the biggest refund they’ve ever had through…the Working Families Tax Cuts Act. These are all things that are really relatable to people, I think that will help turn people out.”
Other House Republicans who traveled with Trump on Tuesday are Reps. Zach Nunn, R-Iowa, and Ashley Hinson, R-Iowa, the latter of whom is running for U.S. Senate.
President Donald Trump arrives to speak about the economy at a rally, Jan. 27, 2026, in Clive, Iowa. (Charlie Neibergall/AP Photo)
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
Before the speech, they and Trump traveled to the Machine Shed, a restaurant near the rally venue where they met with everyday Iowa voters.
“They wanted their hats signed, they want their napkins signed, they wanted to talk to him about, you know, how things were, and what he has done over the last year has truly benefited them,” Feenstra said. “We had one gentleman pray with him, which I found very interesting. He just said, ‘Hey, Mr. President, will you pray with me?’ And they prayed together. So it was just the Iowa way of life.”
Politics
Pasadena Jewish Temple sues Edison for igniting Eaton fire
The Pasadena Jewish Temple and Center filed a lawsuit against Southern California Edison Tuesday, claiming the electric company was to blame for igniting last year’s Eaton fire, which destroyed the congregation’s historic sanctuary, preschool and other buildings.
“Our congregation has been without a physical home for more than a year, at a time when our members had the deepest need for refuge and healing,” Senior Rabbi Joshua Ratner said in a statement. “While we’ve continued to gather and support one another, the loss is deeply felt.”
David Eisenhauer, an Edison spokesman, said the company would respond to the complaint through the court process.
“Our hearts remain with the people affected by the Eaton fire,” Eisenhauer said. “We remain committed to wildfire mitigation through grid hardening, situational awareness and enhanced operational practices.”
The temple had served hundreds of Jewish families since 1941. Congregation members were able to save little more than its sacred Torah scrolls.
The lawsuit, filed in Los Angeles County Superior Court, claims Edison failed to follow its own safety protocols despite advance warnings of extremely dangerous red flag conditions in an area known to be at high threat of wildfires.
The complaint points to the utility’s failure to de-energize its transmission lines that night, as well as its decision to leave up a decommissioned line that hadn’t carried electricity for decades.
It also cites a Times investigation that found that Edison fell behind in doing maintenance that it told state regulators was needed and began billing customers for.
“SCE’s maintenance backlog and unutilized maintenance funds show that it was highly likely that the subject electrical infrastructure that ignited the Eaton Fire was improperly inspected, maintained, repaired, and otherwise operated, which foreseeably led to the Eaton Fire’s ignition,” the complaint states.
The lawsuit seeks financial compensation for destruction of the campus, as well as injunctive relief aimed at preventing Edison from causing more wildfires in the future.
The government investigation into the cause of the fire has not yet been released.
Pedro Pizarro, chief executive of Edison International, the utility’s parent company, has said that a leading theory is that a century-old, dormant transmission line in Eaton Canyon briefly became energized that night, causing sparks that ignited the fire.
Edison is already facing hundreds of lawsuits from fire victims, as well as one by the U.S. Department of Justice. The utility is offering compensation to victims who agree to give up their right to sue the company for the blaze.
Under California law, most of those payments, as well as the lawsuit settlements, are expected to be covered by a state wildfire fund that lawmakers created to shield the three biggest for-profit utilities from bankruptcy if their equipment ignites a catastrophic fire. Some wildfire victims say the law has gone too far and doesn’t keep the utilities accountable for their mistakes.
The temple’s lawsuit details how investigators have found Edison’s equipment to have caused multiple wildfires in the last 10 years, including the the Round Fire in 2015, the Rey Fire in 2016, the Thomas, Creek, and Rye fires in 2017,and the Woolsey Fire in 2018.
Investigators also found that Edison’s power lines sparked the Fairview fire in 2022, which killed two people.
-
Illinois7 days agoIllinois school closings tomorrow: How to check if your school is closed due to extreme cold
-
Pittsburg, PA1 week agoSean McDermott Should Be Steelers Next Head Coach
-
Pennsylvania3 days agoRare ‘avalanche’ blocks Pennsylvania road during major snowstorm
-
Lifestyle1 week agoNick Fuentes & Andrew Tate Party to Kanye’s Banned ‘Heil Hitler’
-
Sports1 week agoMiami star throws punch at Indiana player after national championship loss
-
Science1 week agoContributor: New food pyramid is a recipe for health disasters
-
Technology6 days agoRing claims it’s not giving ICE access to its cameras
-
Politics3 days agoTrump’s playbook falters in crisis response to Minneapolis shooting