Republicans have a shrinking mandate

President-elect Donald Trump is about to resume a second term as president with such a slim GOP majority in the House of Representatives that it offers the party little if any room for error.

Republicans deliriously reveling about their supposed “huge election mandate” may want to keep a lid on such unabashed glee. As final results are being tabulated from California, the party appears to have the smallest House majority in more than a century.

Republican Rep. Michelle Steel lost her Orange County seat to Army vet Derek Tran, while as of this writing Rep. John Duarte narrowly trails Democratic challenger Adam Gray in his Fresno-area district.

If Duarte loses his race, Republicans would control nine of 52 House seats in California. Gerrymandering in California, New York (19-7 Democratic to GOP seats), Illinois (14-3), and Massachusetts (9-0) means four states will deliver 85 of the Democrats’ 215 seats in the next Congress.

While Republican leaders are likely breathing some small sigh of relief at remaining in the majority, the numbers are cause for alarm. Due to its ever-decreasing small majority, the GOP has been unable to ratify its own partisan bills into law, which House Democrats were powerless to stop.

Notably, come January, three prominent GOP figures are out. Rep. Matt Gaetz of Florida resigned last week and won’t return to the house; Rep. Mike Waltz of Florida vacating his seat to join Donald Trump’s White House team; and Rep. Elise Stefanik of New York is relinquishing her position to become the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations.

Once it’s all said in done, Republicans could begin the next Congress with just a one-seat majority.

In the immediate days after the 2024 election, House Speaker Mike Johnson supposedly pleaded with Trump to cease recruiting too aggressively from his House conference for administration positions given this fact.

“It’s a great problem to have. We have an embarrassment of riches in the House Republican Congress. Lots of talented people who are very attuned to the America First agenda, and they can serve the country well in other capacities. But I’ve told President Trump, enough already, give me some relief. I have to maintain this majority. And he understands that, of course, we’ve been talking about it almost hourly every day,” Johnson added.

I bet they have.

One message that many conservatives have failed to grasp is that, while the majority of voters who cast ballots did so for the Trump-Vance ticket, such support for Republicans is conditional at best. The party fared better in the Senate, gaining three seats, but they won each by narrow margins. In fact, the party lost races in Wisconsin, Michigan, and Nevada despite party operatives believing such contests to be winnable.

Now that they have complete control, Republicans have limited time to get things accomplished. If congressional history is any indication, the party is likely to lose House control in 2026, and the partisan Senate map is shaping up to be an arduous one for them. Voters tend to stay home or refrain from voting in non-presidential election years, especially when Trump isn’t on the ballot. The window for opportunity and accomplishment is radically narrow. Members’ attention will turn to political survival in 2026.

Some of us ardent political junkies will avidly watch and wait to see if House Republicans work together or remain a fragmented group of political factions. Yes, the menacing Matt Gaetz will no longer be a factor, but other right-wing carnival barkers are still present to wreak political havoc and point fingers.

Can Donald Trump and Speaker Johnson keep their subjects in line? Time will tell, but factionalism will mean the end of a functioning majority, a pyrrhic victory at best and guaranteed defeat in 2026.

Copyright 2024 Elwood Watson, distributed by Cagle Cartoons newspaper syndicate

Elwood Watson is a professor of history, Black studies, and gender and sexuality studies at East Tennessee State University. He is also an author and public speaker.