Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La. )’s decision to support a short-term stopgap spending bill marks the latest instance of the new Speaker rejecting tactics favored by hardline conservatives as he navigates a barebones GOP majority. Speaker Mike Johnson’s (R-La.) decision to support a stopgap short-term spending bill is the latest example of how the new Speaker has rejected tactics that are favored by conservative hardliners as he navigates an bare-bones GOP majority.

The bipartisan proposal lowers the likelihood of a partial shutdown of the government after the Friday deadline. It also mirrors the conservatives’ two-step framework that was part of the prior continuing resolution (CR), in order to prevent a massive, end-of year, whole-of the-government omnibus.

Hard-liners are not happy with the decision of the new Speaker to negotiate a “clean” continuing agreement with Democrats.

The House Freedom Caucus posted on X (formerly Twitter) Sunday, “This is surrender,” accusing the leadership of trying “at Pelosi’s levels with Biden policy” to pass spending bills.

After Johnson and his diverse political conference deliberated, the congressional leaders settled on a two step CR to extend funding until March 1 and 8 to give lawmakers more time for the formal appropriations processes.

Hard-line conservatives urged Johnson last week to embrace a continuing resolution that would last through September 2024, potentially. This would have activated a 1 percent cut across the board mechanism included in the deal reached by McCarthy and Biden on the debt ceiling last year.

The conference leaders argued that a threat of cuts across the board would give them leverage to achieve conservative policy goals and renegotiate a bipartisan agreement on top-line spending announced earlier in the month.

Johnson’s agreement with Democratic leaders to reach a top-line deal of roughly $1.66 trillion also attracted the ire and urgings of conservatives.

Johnson, who had in November declared that he would no longer be using short-term continuing agreements, also had to deal with moderates and appropriators in his own party who warned against reversing the agreement. They argued that the shorter continuing resolutions would be a better incentive for completing the regular fiscal 2024 budget process.

According to a participant, Johnson had asked a group moderate GOP legislators if they would support a continuing resolution for the full year after a series of closed-door sessions last week.

Johnson ultimately chose to side with the moderates and the appropriators. He stuck with the agreement he had made with Democrats, and supported a “clean” continuance resolution. This was a double blow for the right-wing of his conference.

Conservatives have already expressed their outrage.

“Enough of the continuing resolutions. We have had ample time to discuss funding levels. Congress continues to delay this issue while our southern border is still a mess, and our national debt continues its upward spiral. “We are doing the American public a disservice,” wrote Andy Biggs (R, Arizona), a former chair of the Freedom Caucus on X.

Rep. Mark Alford, R-Mo., said in an interview with Fox Business on Tuesday: “It is unacceptable that we keep pushing this issue down the road.” During an interview with Fox Business, Tuesday. “I won’t be a member of it.”

Johnson has, on his part, praised some of the budgetary tweaks that he achieved in the top-line agreement. These include accelerating cuts of a planned IRS financing boost and additional clawbacks for pandemic aid.

While he admitted that the top-line agreement was “not everything we want,” he said it was the “best they could do” in a divided Washington.

It’s not the best bargain we could have gotten if we had control of both chambers and White House. Johnson, speaking to reporters at the Capitol last Thursday, said that it was the best deal we could make under the circumstances.

The Speaker is under pressure from more than just the hardliners. Johnson has to deal with a historically thin House majority, made more difficult by the absence of House Majority leader Steve Scalise (R – La). Rep. Hal Rogers, R-Ky. was hospitalized after a car accident and is undergoing cancer treatment. If Republicans are able to maintain full attendance, they can afford two votes lost on any party line measure.

And any measure will have to get through the Democratic-controlled Senate and signed by President Biden.

Johnson, to get around conservative opposition, will probably have to bring up the continuing resolution in the House as a suspension of rules. This is a quick-tracked process that avoids the need for a first approval of a procedural vote that dictates terms of debate.

While rule votes are usually mundane, routine referendums where the majority votes for them and the minorities vote against them, hard-liners have voted in opposition to rules several times in the current Congress as a means of expressing their frustration at the leadership.

If Johnson is forced to pass the bill under suspension of rules, which requires two thirds support to pass, the Speaker will be heavily reliant on Democrats to clear a continuing resolution. Johnson needs at least 77 Republicans to pass the measure if all 213 Democrats support it.

Conservatives admit that they lack the leverage to prevent the continuing resolution from being passed, even if there is bipartisan support.

The Speaker and the rest of the House can’t do much about it when all the Democrats want to vote for a certain thing, but there are a lot of Republicans who don’t want to face anything,” said Scott Perry, a former Freedom Caucus Chair, on Fox Business Tuesday.

Johnson’s right-wing critics have also voiced their frustration with his other actions, including temporarily extending the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act to include foreign espionage.

Hard-liners like Rep. Chip Roy, R-Texas and Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga. have floated a potential “motion to vacate” — the same process that led to McCarthy’s removal from his top House position last year.

As hardliners appear to be accepting defeat over the short-term fix, they turn their attention to securing any further wins on migration and border policy — a subject that could be another test to Johnson.

“We are asking that border security be included in the discussions over government funding and not something that will only be resolved at some future Christmas,” said Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., last week. He was referring to ongoing bipartisan talks on border security for Ukraine.

Johnson, who has been opposed to the plan being discussed, has expressed his disapproval of the deal that the negotiators are yet to announce after months of discussions.