Christopher Harris: Need a speaker? How about Hal?

Oct. 6—When it comes to Speakers of the U.S. House of Representatives, Kentucky was something of a hotbed for them prior to the 20th century, with four different men from the Bluegrass holding that title between 1811 and 1887.

Perhaps the most historically notable of these was Lexington's Henry Clay, who took the position on three separate occasions during his time as a representative (he also served in the U.S. Senate, and was Secretary of State for President John Quincy Adams). Clay had a nickname that has stuck in the annals of history — "the great compromiser."

It may be time for Kentucky's fifth Speaker of the House, one who — under the circumstances — could be known as "the great compromise": Somerset's own Harold "Hal" Rogers.

This column is something of an exercise in frivolity as I could probably safely bet my right leg that this won't actually happen, for a variety of reasons. But maybe it should.

Things are rotten in the state of the Republican Party right now. (For those of you who want to determine how you should read this column based on the personal biases of the writer, I should make it clear that I am registered as neither a Republican nor a Democrat, so make of that what you will.) House Speaker Kevin McCarthy — who has only been in that position of leadership following his party's gaining control of the U.S. House in last November's elections — was ousted from it Tuesday after what was essentially a coup by members of his own Grand Old Party.

Bringing to mind a less violent revisitation of the last meeting between Julius Caesar and Brutus, Florida Rep. Matt Gaetz succeeded in his goal of removing McCarthy from the House's top spot, who has been quoted as saying that the "conservative agenda was being paralyzed by Speaker McCarthy." Eight Republicans joined Democrats in voting McCarthy out of his Speakership — and here it is, not even the Ides of March yet.

(For students of history, there may be amusements in the idea of a politician named McCarthy essentially being blacklisted by his own party, or of his immediate replacement being named Patrick McHenry — give him liberty, or give him speaker pro tempore status.)

What we know is that Rogers, who represents Kentucky's Fifth Congressional District in Washington and has done so for nearly 43 years now, in the midst of his 22nd term, was not in favor of McCarthy's removal, calling it a "monumental mistake" and that McCarthy "showed immense courage and leadership by negotiating a deal to avoid a government shutdown, even at the risk of losing his gavel."

Rogers became the Dean of the House — that is, the longest-serving member of that proud body of United States politics — in March 2022. Perhaps his key duty in that role was to swear in McCarthy, something I know from my own conversations with Rogers that he was looking forward to upon becoming Dean. That vote in January was not an easy one, and Rogers at the time urged his Republican colleagues to unite and "show comity and strength for the party and this great nation."

If they did, it didn't last long, as we saw this week. I'm not here to pick sides, or to say whether to say the decision to replace McCarthy was right or wrong. That's not what I'm interested in here. But what I can say is that in an arena where optics unfortunately often seem to matter more than substance, whatever justification the decision against McCarthy may or may not warrant is bogged down in the fact that it just looks really bad, especially for a party that's got much bigger fish to fry in next year's presidential elections. The GOP looks like a bit of a mess right now, and could benefit from some stability and gravity in its next speaker selection.

Enter Hal Rogers.

If anybody knows Washington — if anybody has seen just about everything U.S. politics has to offer — it's Rogers. Nothing should throw this man at this point. He served during the fall of the Berlin Wall, during 9/11 (and chaired the first Subcommittee on Homeland Security in the wake of it), during Covid-19. He came in with Ronald Reagan, and has also worked from his position in Congress with Bill Clinton, Barack Obama, Donald Trump, Joe Biden, and two different members of the Bush family in the White House. He has held the prestigious position of Chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, and has basically come to win re-election with the same ease as the Harlem Globetrotters had against the Washington Generals.

In short, if anyone — Republican or otherwise — has earned the right to be top dog in the house, based on resume alone, it would be Rogers.

Perhaps the most impressive thing about Rogers is how he has served virtually scandal-free over four decades in a job rife with corruption and sordid behavior. I've been at the Commonwealth Journal long enough now that I've covered very nearly half of his career in Washington, and aside from complaints about his spending on his home region from this media outlet or that one — think in terms of "pork" — there hasn't been much negative attention cast his way. About those criticisms, I would say that the people of eastern Kentucky have obviously appreciated the federal dollars sent their way based on their voting record, and it's been perhaps the most beneficial kind of government spending, for infrastructure that has helped one of the nation's most rural regions move forward into the 21st century.

Really, the only true scandal of anything relating to character that I can recall for Rogers was last year, when he told fellow U.S. Rep. Joyce Beatty to "kiss" his posterior (substitute a shorter word there) in a disagreement over Rogers wearing a face mask. Rogers apologized for his actions in that incident, and I will agree that it represented a lack of tact, though it would be hypocritical of me to judge him too harshly for that, as certainly not all of the words that have come from my mouth have been covered with sugar and honey, and I suspect that's true for most of us. If that's the worst thing Rogers has done in Washington, a place that rivals "Star Wars" city Mos Eisley for being a "wretched hive of scum and villainy," that's actually pretty impressive.

All this makes it seem like Rogers would be the ideal person to steady the GOP ship in rough waters, the way I see it. However, I'm quite certain that actual Republican leadership would paraphrase another HAL (9000) and say, "I'm sorry, I'm afraid we can't do that."

For one thing, Rogers is 85 years old. As McCarthy recently learned firsthand, the speaker's job is not an easy one, and at that age, I can't imagine Rogers would even want the stress that goes along with that kind of leadership limelight. While McCarthy's Democrat predecessor Nancy Pelosi was more in Rogers' demographic, more recent Republican selections have been in the sweet spot of their political careers, people like McCarthy, Paul Ryan, John Boehner, Dennis Hastert, Newt Gingrich — and Boehner was the only one to even be over 60 when he took the job.

And while some of the names Gaetz has supported as potential replacements for McCarthy are among those that didn't join the former in going after the latter, one still gets the feeling those who didn't want McCarthy would seek someone who's more of a conservative firebrand than an establishment figure, and let's face it, Rogers is not actually anywhere on the vanguard. He was not among the Republicans who were particularly resistant to Trump but neither has Rogers been much more than a steady voice for the GOP, largely going along with what the core of the party has been expected to do. Whether you see this as being for better or worse, Rogers is an institution guy, not an out-of-the-box or fringe guy.

So no, I do not expect that Hal Rogers will be our next official Speaker of the House (no disrespect, Mr. McHenry). I do not expect he would even want to be, nor do I expect that he'll be a candidate in any real way.

But that is because politics is rarely a meritocracy. It isn't necessarily about the specific things you've accomplished, or the hours you've put into the job. It is about opportunity, it is about image, it is about presentation, and it is about popularity. It is about the voters looking at a candidate and finding something there to be passionate about, to get excited about, and often even about finding someone who looks the part on camera.

For everything that he is, Rogers isn't flashy. He reliably delivers a good solid speech, with some memorable quips and the kind of Washington war stories that only four decades of political service can provide. He basically puts his head down and goes to work finding funding for various projects in his home region, and supports his party in major votes affecting the nation at large.

Whether you agree with him or not (and no, I don't always agree with him on everything, nor do I always disagree), Rogers is about as sturdy and dependable a political public servant as one can hope for these days. I personally think that makes him the perfect choice for Speaker of the House, and I also know that's exactly why he isn't that in real life.

But let's be clear, Republicans: You could do a lot worse than Hal Rogers.