Opinion | The Near-Implosion of Kevin McCarthy Offers Lessons for the Left

Before Kevin McCarthy could become speaker, he had to bend the knee to the true power in the Republican conference: the House Freedom Caucus.

Since its creation in 2015, the Freedom Caucus has won battle after battle with the GOP establishment. In the most recent round, the caucus extracted a promise that McCarthy would use a debt ceiling fight as an opportunity to push for deep spending cuts. When conservative hard-liners say “Jump,” party leaders ask, “How high?”

While the ends of the Freedom Caucus are clearly out of touch with most Americans, its means are an object lesson to any faction in Congress that aims to exert influence over their party.

The Freedom Caucus is hardly alone in marshaling the power of its relatively modest numbers on Capitol Hill. The centrist Problem Solvers Caucus proved willing and able to force Democratic leadership into compromises that benefited business interests and the wealthy during the last Congress.

But the left has no equivalent in the fight for working people and racial equality. The Congressional Progressive Caucus is valuable, but it simply cannot fill that role (more on that below). At a moment of struggle against insurrectionary authoritarians on the right and corporate-allied Democrats in the center, the left needs a new vehicle to leverage our collective power on behalf of the people who need it most.

It’s time for a new Justice Caucus.

The idea of forming a Freedom Caucus on the left has been discussed for years, but the 2022 midterms offer a real opportunity after a new round of left-wing Democrats were elected to Congress. The addition of five strong progressives backed by groups like the Justice Democrats and Working Families Party will bring the total number of Squad and Squad-adjacent members into the double digits in the House.

A Justice Caucus would be progressive and populist. It would focus unrelentingly on shifting wealth and power from the ruling class in a way that would help Democrats reclaim their historic connection to organized labor and the working classes that are starting to turn toward the GOP. A Justice Caucus would counter the influence of the Freedom Caucus and strengthen both democracy and the Democratic Party.

This new caucus would represent the millions of Americans — especially the overwhelming majority of voters under 40 — who preferred Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth Warren in the 2020 primary. In that contest, roughly half of Democrats indicated they want the party to fight for a Green New Deal, Medicare for All, free college tuition and universal pre-k, and affordable and accessible home care and childcare. The Justice Caucus would serve as a platform for the voters, organizations and elected officials looking to promote a social democratic agenda and build power together within the Democratic Party.

The Freedom Caucus has been an incredibly effective tool for the conservative movement because it has shown it will use its leverage during tough negotiations with leadership. A Justice Caucus would serve as a similarly tightly defined, ideologically coherent group that would eventually gain the ability to vote down measures deemed insufficiently progressive.

The Justice Caucus would serve as a crucial complement, not replacement, to the Congressional Progressive Caucus. But it’s also true that it’s time for something new. The CPC was founded in 1991, a fundamentally different political era. Until last session, there were no ideological or strategic commitments one needed to make to join the caucus. The CPC currently consists of 103 members — the largest it’s ever been — ranging from the most progressive Democrats to members of the more conservative Blue Dog Coalition. It consists of freshmen, as well as members of leadership like newly elected Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries. In a group as broad and ideologically diverse as the CPC, it is nearly impossible to gain unanimity, let alone a majority, for any major decisions on strategy or ideological direction.

While the CPC has served as a useful and powerful tool to move members in a progressive direction, it is simply too large and heterogeneous to serve as a voting bloc in key moments. Meanwhile, the Squad (now up to eight members) is simply too small to have enough votes to serve as a veto. A Justice Caucus that’s bigger than the squad and smaller than the CPC would have the votes and the ideological alignment to withhold their support from certain leadership-backed measures that Democrats should really never pass.

The Congressional Progressive Caucus would continue to serve a critical outreach and educational function, and as an important site of coordination among the broadest definition of progressives. Conservatives have succeeded at creating a similar arrangement between the ideologically tight Freedom Caucus (which has 54 members) and the broader, outreach-oriented Republican Study Group (which has 156 members). Like the Freedom Caucus, the Justice Caucus would decide when they leverage their votes together. Like the Republican Study Group, the CPC would present arguments, policy ideas and information to persuade members to be more progressive.

In the last session of Congress, CPC Chair Pramila Jayapal and CPC leadership made an impressive, historic effort at turning the caucus into a more ideologically coherent and strategically unified bloc. Their efforts to negotiate with the White House and then-Speaker Nancy Pelosi successfully delayed passage of a centrist-crafted infrastructure bill amid broader policy talks and helped contribute to the eventual passage of the Inflation Reduction Act.

The CPC’s work to bring progressives together was a remarkable success given the challenging circumstances. But it also ultimately wasn’t enough to secure President Joe Biden’s full legislative agenda, and the saga shows the difficulties inherent in trying to transform a caucus that represents roughly half of all House Democrats into a disciplined unit. In truth, at most, a third of CPC members are really willing to buck party leadership when the chips are down. The CPC will continue to be necessary, but it is easier to create a newer, smaller caucus that is capable of serving as a unified bloc, instead of trying to carve down a broad, ideologically diverse group.

By creating a new Justice Caucus, members would have a blank slate to define criteria for joining, so the caucus can take a unified strategic and ideological direction. Without the willingness and ability to block key votes, the left has only powerful tweets and strongly worded letters.

It’s true that an ideologically motivated caucus has more opportunities for leverage when their party is in power. But even in a GOP-controlled House, there are going to be times when progressives’ votes count. If Democratic leaders are making concessions to the corporate wing of the party, or to the Republicans, the left will have a chance to kill or modify any deal. Particularly given the tiny size of the Republican majority, a Justice Caucus of 12-35 members could extract real wins on any bipartisan, must-pass package.

A new Justice Caucus won’t succeed all at once. The Squad and other rising progressives in Congress are part of a generational project to reclaim the Democratic Party for working people, revive the labor movement, and put the country on the path toward multiracial social democracy. While there have always been stalwarts of the cause, the emergence of today’s left wing of the Democratic Party began in earnest with Bernie Sanders’ 2016 primary campaign. It took conservatives 16 years to get from Barry Goldwater’s failed 1964 campaign to Ronald Reagan’s 1980 victory. Progressives aiming to seize the mantle of the Democratic Party are on a similar schedule. In time, we will mature into the kind of sophisticated political force the conservative movement has become.

For the left, part of learning how to take power means getting better at wielding the power we already have. Forming a Justice Caucus this session would be an opportunity for the new generation of leftists in Congress to improve on shared decision-making and joint strategy without being in the crucible of the majority. Besides, the efforts we take now will prepare us for a larger role in governance when Democrats do return to the majority. It will be our turn to lead sooner than it seems.