Who is Mike Johnson? New U.S. House speaker belongs to GOP’s religious conservative wing

 BY: JACOB FISCHLER 

Before a relatively short time in elected office, new U.S. House Speaker Mike Johnson of Louisiana was a constitutional lawyer deeply involved in religious causes.

Prior to a short stint in the Louisiana Legislature, Johnson spent two decades as a public interest lawyer mainly representing clients in so-called religious liberty litigation, he said in an interview with C-SPAN shortly after joining Congress in 2017. He worked in private practice for the Kitchens Law Firm in North Louisiana, and also did work for the conservative Christian group Alliance Defending Freedom, according to a 2015 article in the New Orleans Time-Picayune.

He also “litigated high profile constitutional law cases” defending Second Amendment rights, free speech and free market principles, according to his campaign website.

House Republicans’ choice of Johnson addressed two faults some members of the conference found with a previous speaker-designee who dropped out on Tuesday, Minnesota’s Tom Emmer.

Emmer voted to certify the 2020 presidential election, putting him at odds with former President Donald Trump, the front-runner for the 2024 presidential nomination, and for a bill codifying same-sex and interracial marriage. Johnson was on the other side of both votes.

The Louisianan was a strong backer of Trump’s claims that his reelection loss in 2020 was illegitimate. He led 126 House Republicans in an amicus brief to the U.S. Supreme Court in a case seeking to overturn Trump’s loss to Joe Biden in that election. And Johnson voted to object to the 2020 election results from Arizona and Pennsylvania, even after a pro-Trump mob attacked the U.S. Capitol.

In Congress, Johnson has maintained a reputation as an opponent of abortion rights and same-sex marriage. He has an ‘A+’ rating from the anti-abortion Susan B. Anthony List in the last two sessions of Congress and a 100% rating for the current year from FRC Action, the legislative arm of the influential evangelical group Family Research Council.

New House Speaker Mike Johnson was picked over previous speaker-designee Tom Emmer of Minnesota, who voted to certify the 2020 presidential election, putting him at odds with former President Donald Trump, the front-runner for the 2024 presidential nomination, and for a bill codifying same-sex and interracial marriage. Johnson was on the other side of both votes. 

The League of Conservation Voters, an environmental advocacy group, has given him a 2% lifetime rating, lower than all but 24 current House members, all Republicans.

He’s received $338,000 in campaign contributions to his personal campaign and leadership committee since 2015 from oil and gas interests influential in Louisiana — the most of any industry, according to Open Secrets, a nonprofit campaign finance tracking organization. He’s also maintained ties to religious conservatives after coming to Washington.

He taught online college courses at Liberty University, a conservative Christian school in Virginia, earning him just less than $30,000 in 2022, according to his most recent personal financial disclosure, required for members of Congress.

His wife earned income in 2022 from Onward Christian Education Services Inc. and Louisiana Right to Life Educational Committee Inc., according to his financial disclosure.

Johnson’s voting record is strongly conservative, and he has little record of working across the aisle. He voted against high-profile bipartisan laws, including the $1.2 trillion infrastructure law, a gun safety law and a reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act.

Fundraising gap

Johnson’s campaign fundraising operation has increased by small margins in each cycle since his first House run in 2016. He raised $1.1 million for his first run and over $1.3 million for his most recent reelection, according to Open Secrets. The numbers include money raised for Johnson’s leadership political action committees.

Part of a speaker’s role in modern times has been as a fundraising force for rank-and-file members. Johnson will have to expand his fundraising to replace the prolific Kevin McCarthy, whom eight GOP members ousted three weeks ago.

McCarthy, of California, has raised more than $15 million so far this cycle for his own campaign and his leadership committee. Emmer, the No. 3 House Republican, has raised $3.7 million. Johnson has raised just less than $600,000.

The largest single contributor to Johnson and his leadership PACs over his five campaigns has been Willis-Knighton Health System, a hospital system based in Shreveport whose employees have given $91,000 to Johnson’s campaigns.

House Freedom Fund, the political action committee associated with the far-right House Freedom Caucus, is his second-largest contributor. It has sent $58,000 to Johnson since the 2016 cycle.

A spokesperson for his House office did not respond to an inquiry about whom Johnson represented as an attorney.

Johnson’s legal work does not appear to have been overly profitable. He claimed no assets in his most recent financial disclosure, which is unusual.

House members are required to report any assets worth more than $1,000. Those assets can include real estate, retirement accounts, investment portfolios or simple savings accounts. Many members report millions of dollars in such assets.

Johnson listed between $280,000 and $600,000 in liabilities, most of which was from a home mortgage of between $250,000 and $500,000. The rest of his debt was split between a personal loan taken out in July 2016 and a home equity line of credit taken out in February 2019.

–Ariana Figueroa and Ashley Murray contributed to this report.

This article originally appeared in The Louisiana Illuminator on October 26th, 2023.  

Please support and visit The Brooks Blackboard's website for more news stories, and my brief bio.

On social media, visit me on 

Facebook: The Brooks Blackboard 

Twitter: @_CharlesBrooks   

Landry’s red wave to victory for governor also carries GOP women toward statewide office

Ultraconservative state lawmakers also avoid runoffs

Attorney General Jeff Landry’s stunning win in the governor’s race Saturday overwhelmed most other election news, but a few notable trends also emerged. Landry was not the only person with a surprising election victory this weekend. A handful of ultraconservative Louisiana Senate candidates also won their races outright and avoided November runoff elections.

State Reps. Rick Edmonds of Baton Rouge, Valarie Hodges of Denham Springs, Blake Miguez of Erath and Alan Seabaugh of Shreveport each claimed open Senate seats in the Legislature Saturday over fellow Republicans who are more moderate. Incumbent Sen. Stewart Cathey, R-Monroe, also beat a GOP challenger who was perceived to be more middle-of-the-road.

Hodges, Miguez and Seabaugh are among the most conservative members of the Louisiana House and have often challenged Republican legislative leadership on spending issues. They were among the 19 legislators who wanted the state to spend hundreds of millions of dollars less on roads and other infrastructure projects this year in order to limit government spending. 

Republicans advancing to the runoff stages of the attorney  general and treasurer races — Liz Murrill and John Fleming, respectively — were also the more conservative options in their primary races. They beat out other, more middle-of-the-road GOP candidates to head into the next stage of the election against Democrats on Nov. 18. 

The right turn in the state Senate should make life easier for Landry as governor. An ultraconservative himself, he should have fewer disputes with lawmakers overall because more of them will be aligned with his political ideology. 

Women rising

Louisiana has not had a woman in statewide office since early 2015, when former U.S. Sen. Mary Landrieu left office after losing her reelection to Bill Cassidy.

But in 2024, women will hold at least two of Louisiana’s nine elected statewide offices no matter what happens in the runoffs.

Murrill and Democrat Lindsey Cheek have made it into the runoff for attorney general, and Republican Nancy Landry and Democrat Gwen Collins-Greenup will face each other in the secretary of state’s runoff.

Murrill and Nancy Landry, as Republicans, are considered the favorites to win the races, even though Louisiana has never had two Republican women serving in statewide office at the same time.  

The last time Louisiana had two women in statewide office at all was the beginning of 2008, right before former Gov. Kathleen Blanco stepped down and Landrieu was still in Congress. 

Low voter turnout 

Voter turnout was even lower than political experts and outgoing Secretary of State Kyle Ardoin predicted it would be for this election cycle. 

Unofficial returns indicated statewide turnout of registered voters in the governor’s race was 35.8%. Ardoin’s office predicted between 42% and 46%, and political consultant and pollster John Couvillon thought it would come in between 38% and 40%. 

Registered voter turnout dropped by 10 points from the last gubernatorial primary election in 2019, when it was 45.9%. Gov. John Bel Edwards received 625,970 votes in that election, but only 47% of the overall vote. By comparison, Jeff Landry won the governor’s race Saturday with 547,828 votes and 52% of the overall vote. 

The decrease was more dramatic in Democratic and Black voter strongholds. Orleans Parish voter turnout was nearly 12 points higher, 38.7% in 2019 compared with 27% this weekend. East Baton Rouge Parish voter turnout dropped even more dramatically, by about 13 points from 48% in 2019 to 34.9%.

Low Democratic voter turnout is thought to have benefitted Landry and other conservative candidates, since those constituents are the least likely to vote for far-right Republicans.

This article originally appeared in The Louisiana Illuminator on October 15th, 2023.  

Related Posts

Bland gubernatorial election threatens to suppress voter turnout, Verite News 

Please support and visit The Brooks Blackboard's website for more news stories, and my brief bio.

On social media, visit me on 

Facebook: The Brooks Blackboard 

Twitter: @_CharlesBrooks   

2014 Elections: The Democratic Party's problem with white Democrats

By Charles Brooks

While the 2014 elections showed Democrats their difficulties in defeating Republicans, the elections also revealed the problem the Democratic Party has in appealing to their white constituents. The Democrats now find themselves in a very precarious position as they find a way to put together a message that resonates with the white as well as the black voter. Let’s consider for a moment the 2014 exit poll, particularly the questions about race relations. For example, 40% said race relations in the country had stayed about the same in the last few years. 38% said they had gotten worse while 20% said they’ve gotten better. Certainly no surprise here but let’s consider remarks made by the Congressional Black Caucus Chairperson, Marcia Fudge (D-OH) when she stated that Democrats lost the white Southerners due in part to racism. “Democrats lost Senate control because we failed to mobilize young voters across racial and regional spectrums. We failed to persuade Southern voters to hold true to core Democratic values. We lost because the Hispanic community was insufficiently motivated. We lost because of ideological differences within the Democratic Party and with our Administration. We lost because our party has, to some extent, lost white Southerners due in part to the race of our President. We lost because the Supreme Court decisions in Citizens United and McCutcheon allowed a select few to subvert the political process with secret, unlimited money.  We lost because of gerrymandering in our state redistricting processes. We lost because of our continuing problem with a clear and compelling message that would encourage voters to stay with us.  Let the talking heads do what they do best: talk. But let’s be very clear in our analyses of the 2014 midterm elections. African Americans showed up. So don’t blame us! A review of the 2014 exit poll data verifies Rep. Fudge’s statement as the data indicates that while voter turnout for Hispanics and Blacks increased, the voter turnout for Whites went down, and overall turnout was quite low. 

2014 Elections: Can Black America rescue the Democrats?

 By Charles Brooks

The many months of political posturing and rhetoric will finally come to an end on Election night when we learn who’s hand will be raised in victory in this year’s battle between the Democrats and Republicans.  Reading the recent news accounts, polls and analyses about this year’s mid-term elections, is almost like reading a political obituary for the Democratic Party – the forecast just doesn’t look good for Democrats. Simply put, Democrats are faced with daunting odds to win elections and will probably suffer more than just a few defeats. To make matters worse, this year’s election cycle is taking place during an off presidential election year when people typically don’t vote.  Meanwhile the 2014 mid-term elections are framed for public consumption as one where there’s a lot at stake – how many times have you heard that during this year’s election cycle?  Typically during these election cycles you will find news stories about the significance of the black vote as well as contrasting stories about the black vote being taken for granted by the Democratic Party.  But what appears to be different with the 2014 elections is the degree of just how important, how significant the black vote will be for the DemocraticParty.

The issue, however, is that while President Obama is not running in this year’s election – his legacy certainly is in the running. Consider for a moment just two items and how they would impact the President’s legacy - the Republican’s incessant chatter about impeachment along with the repeal of President Obama’s signature legislation, the Affordable Care Act (ACA).  With 36 Senate seats up for election: 21 belonging to Democrats versus 15 for Republicans, Black America’s vote is under heavy pursuit to help the Democrats retain their majority in the Senate. The Democratic Party is looking for Black America to shield and protect the President’s legacy from GOP obstructionism. The chairperson of the Congressional Black Caucus, Marcia L. Fudge (D-Ohio) recently told the New York Times: “Anybody who looks at the data realizes that if the black vote, and the brown vote, doesn’t turn out, we can’t win. It’s just that simple,” Ms. Fudge went on to say: “If we don’t turn out, we cannot hold the Senate.” African-Americans could help swing elections in Georgia, Louisiana, North Carolina and possibly Arkansas, a New York Times analysis of voter data shows, but only if they turn out at higher-than-forecast rates. 

The Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies released a report entitled, “Black Turnout & The 2014 Midterms” where they concluded: “The analysis of voter turnout data corroborates the suspicion that this will be a challenging year for Democrats.  Assuming black turnout consistent with recent midterm elections and current polling data, Democrats will find it hard to put together winning coalitions, even with overwhelming African American support. Democratic candidates with the best prospects of winning include those running in states with relatively strong third party candidates who can serve as spoilers and states with small black populations where Democrats (or, in the case of Kansas, Independents) are performing strongly among white voters.”  Wow! So basically the Joint Center report is saying that while the Black vote is being heavily pursued, the black vote still needs the presence of third party candidates to make a difference in the elections.

Yet this pursuit of the black vote presents a bit of a dilemma for Black America; on one hand there’s the sentiment that the Democratic Party routinely takes the black vote for granted while on the other hand, the failure to vote Democratic will compel Republicans to advance a conservative agenda that is in direct contrast to Black America’s political interests.  But there’s another motivating factor to consider here… the relentless campaign waged by Republicans, who took a legislative approach to shrinking the pool of voters.  The stench of 19^th century Jim Crow slowly rises from the graveyard of American racism as Republicans justify their actions with claims of addressing voter fraud.  In essence, they’ve proposed and passed legislation to address a nonexistent issue – incredible don’t you think? These voter suppression measures include requiring a government-issued photo ID to vote and proof of citizenship to register, cutting back on early voting, eliminating Election Day registration, new restrictions on voter registration drives as well as additional barriers to voting for people with criminal convictions.

Subsequently, there’s a political battle setting the Get Out The Vote activities versus stringent voter suppression measures.  Now these measures have been passed – for the most part - by several state legislatures since the election of the nation’s first African American president. So now, you can get a better sense of the significance of the 2014 election when you begin to understand how these voter suppression measures may possibly affect one’s ability to cast a vote. Bear in mind that the Brennan Center for Justice reported that of the 11 states with the highest African American turnout in 2008, seven passed laws making it harder to vote. In addition, of the 12 states with the largest Hispanic population growth in the 2010 Census, nine have new restrictions in place. And of the 15 states that used to be monitored closely under the Voting Rights Act because of a history of racial discrimination in elections, nine passed new restrictions. These reasons alone will almost certainly compel the public’s attention…and their scrutiny on November 4^th.

If nothing else, a review of the exit polls for the 2014 mid-terms can begin to answer at least two critical questions: First, how will Black America respond to the SOS call sent out by Democrats – particularly after revelations of Democrats refusing to stand up in support of President Obama? And the second question - how much did the various voter suppression measures impact black voter turnout and what role, if any, did this have on the many elections held across the nation?

---

https://www.aclu.org/maps/battle-protect-ballot-voter-suppression-measures-passed-2013