Members of the moderate Republican Tuesday Group are trying to figure out how to move forward after Rep. Tom MacArthur, R-N.J., resigned as co-chairman early last week, which has caucus members wondering how they can flex their muscles in future battles, particularly over the budget and tax reform.
MacArthur’s resignation happened at their Tuesday meeting, sparking talks about what’s next for the group and how they should operate now that at least one major battle on healthcare is behind them.
But while the group is looking forward, it’s also looking back at how the healthcare battle ended, and there is something of a split over what lessons should be learned from that fight. MacArthur negotiated a key amendment to the American Health Care Act that would allow states to opt out of key Obamacare insurance regulations, including mandating that insurers cover certain essential health benefits, against the advice of group members.
Many implored him to leave negotiating to those from the key committee members from within the caucus, such as Rep. Greg Walden, the Energy and Commerce Committee chairman, and Rep. Pat Tiberi, who is on the Ways and Means Committee.
Rep. Charlie Dent, R-Pa., one of the group’s co-chairmen, said that the group doesn’t want to make the same mistake twice.
“We’re completely relevant. We’ve always been relevant because we’re the governing wing of the party. Our leadership needs us to get anything done,” Dent told the Washington Examiner. “Anytime they need to get something done of consequence, we’re the people that are seen as the ones… leading the coalition to enact these types of measures. That’s always the case. So we’re extremely relevant and they need to pay attention to us.”
But MacArthur isn’t sure of that and points to the group’s inability to act as one during the healthcare fight after 11 members of the group voted against the bill. Most of those “no” votes were from members who were worried that the bill wouldn’t protect those with pre-existing conditions. Although he remains a caucus member, MacArthur lamented that others are not willing to negotiate with other factions of the party.
“I don’t know,” MacArthur told the Washington Examiner when asked what’s next for the group. “I made an effort to have group be more relevant, have more impact as a group. Different members want different things. You can’t lead people where they don’t want to go. I just came to the conclusion that, for me, I don’t want to change who I am. I’m going to keep negotiating with everyone, that includes the Freedom Caucus, and there are members who just don’t want to do that.”
Some still believe the Tuesday Group can have an impact even when it doesn’t act as a unit, and that the group can allow its members to act independently rather than making decisions as a bloc like the House Freedom Caucus does.
“I think there’s a misunderstanding. People sometimes try to equate how Tuesday Group operates with how the Freedom Caucus does. Kinda — they unionize, they hold their votes. We’ve never been that way. We’ve never demanded to be,” said Adam Kinzinger, R-Ill., a former co-chairman of the caucus. “I think there’s opportunity in the future to maybe vote as a bloc and negotiate, but we just act differently.”
MacArthur concedes that there’s no chance the Tuedsay Group will become a lockstep, center-right version of the Freedom Caucus, which has been nicknamed the “Hell No” caucus over the last few years.
“Nope, nope, nope. That won’t happen,” MacArthur said to the possibility of bloc voting. “I don’t think that’s possible if the group doesn’t want to act as a group, and it doesn’t. That’s what I found.”
“It is [tough to unite]. Look, I get that everyone has different perspectives. I ran a company with thousands of people, I know something about moving people in one direction,” he continued. “This is just not a group that wants that kind of direction. I don’t want to be divisive, nor do I want to change who I am and my view of governing.”
On the other side, Freedom Caucus leader Mark Meadows, R-N.C., says it’s puzzling that MacArthur felt compelled to leave just because he negotiated directly with more conservative Republicans.
“I think it’s a sad day when somebody has to resign from being co-chairman of a caucus because they negotiated in good faith to try to get something done on behalf of the American people. He’s a gentleman. He’s a fine man,” Meadows said.
“I think non-negotiating, whether it’s applies to a Freedom Caucus member or a Tuesday Group member, is a position that is very difficult to sustain,” he added.
