Report: GOP Interest Groups Fret Over HR1’s Popularity With Their Own Constituents

WASHINGTON, DC - MARCH 23: Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) listens as Republican leaders talk to the media after their weekly lunch at the U.S. Capitol on March 23, 2021 in Washington, DC. (Photo by Tas... WASHINGTON, DC - MARCH 23: Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) listens as Republican leaders talk to the media after their weekly lunch at the U.S. Capitol on March 23, 2021 in Washington, DC. (Photo by Tasos Katopodis/Getty Images) MORE LESS
Start your day with TPM.
Sign up for the Morning Memo newsletter

Republicans are concerned about the bipartisan popularity of the campaign finance provisions of HR1, the voting rights package recently passed by the House.

According to the New Yorker, which obtained a recording of a private meeting between a policy adviser to Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) and leaders of many conservative groups, public messaging against those provisions is not going well.

Specifically, support for the bill’s measures forcing more disclosures of secret donors was so broad that a senior operative from the Koch network advised just killing it in Congress rather than trying to turn the tide of public opinion. Currently, S1, HR1’s Senate complement, would face the 60-vote threshold of the filibuster and seems unlikely to garner Republican support.

Kyle McKenzie, the research director for the Koch-run advocacy group Stand Together, reportedly said during the meeting that people found the argument that the bill would stop billionaires from buying elections extremely compelling.

“Unfortunately, we’ve found that that is a winning message, for both the general public and also conservatives,” he reportedly said.

Democrats’ interest in passing HR1 has grown alongside the nationwide push from Republican statehouses to pass restrictive voting laws. A bill out of Georgia that Gov. Brian Kemp (R) signed late last week has engendered particular outrage as well as a couple of lawsuits.

Some, like Sen. Raphael Warnock (D-GA), are using the voter suppression to frame an argument for doing away with the filibuster, or at least making it easier to overcome. Warnock has been pitching it to President Joe Biden as a decision between protecting people’s right to vote, or protecting a Senate procedure.

“You had legislators who are running scared. So rather than having the people select their politician, the politicians try to cherry pick their voters,” Warnock said on CNN this weekend. “This is an assault on the covenant we have with one another as an American people and it is my job to protect it.”

Latest News

Notable Replies

  1. Avatar for mec mec says:

    It sure seems like there might be light at the end of the tunnel. Hope it isn’t an oncoming train.

  2. Specifically, support for the bill’s measures forcing more disclosures of secret donors was so broad that a senior operative from the Koch network advised just killing it in Congress rather than trying to turn the tide of public opinion. Currently, S1, HR1’s Senate complement, would face the 60-vote threshold of the filibuster and seems unlikely to garner Republican support.

    Kyle McKenzie, the research director for the Koch-run advocacy group Stand Together, reportedly said during the meeting that people found the argument that the bill would stop billionaires from buying elections extremely compelling.

    Unfortunately, we’ve found that that is a winning message, for both the general public and also conservatives,” he reportedly said.

    Hey, if you wanna claim to be the “populist” party, you might just discover that your supporters support a “populist” solution…

    If you then subvert their aims, that seems like it undercuts the argument for your appeal to said supporters.

  3. Oh noes! If this bill passes, George Soros won’t be able to secretly destroy American no more!

  4. The people who ran screaming that we should “drain the swamp”—essentially, diminish the influence of money and status in politics—are surprised to find that many of their supporters actually think that would be good. I suppose this is peak hypocrisy—when you’re unpleasantly shocked to find that people actually believed you.

  5. They went from not believing they could win the votes of 47% of the population to trying to endlessly gaslight them into voting for them anyway. Surprise! All they wind up with is a thoroughly confused base…

Continue the discussion at forums.talkingpointsmemo.com

44 more replies

Participants

Avatar for frustum Avatar for austin_dave Avatar for amherstma Avatar for sysprog Avatar for mattinpa Avatar for sparrowhawk Avatar for lastroth Avatar for mtblaze Avatar for southerndem Avatar for caltg Avatar for jmacaz Avatar for uneducated Avatar for brian512 Avatar for hahagoodman Avatar for shade Avatar for loss_mentality Avatar for justruss Avatar for lanabill Avatar for chasfy Avatar for jwbuho Avatar for occamscoin Avatar for rascal_crone Avatar for LeeHarveyGriswold Avatar for CCrockett52

Continue Discussion
Masthead Masthead
Founder & Editor-in-Chief:
Executive Editor:
Managing Editor:
Associate Editor:
Editor at Large:
General Counsel:
Publisher:
Head of Product:
Director of Technology:
Associate Publisher:
Front End Developer:
Senior Designer: