I was happy to see the House Freedom Caucus (HFC) helped defeat the lousy (first?) attempt to change (not repeal) ObamaCare. I admired them for taking a stand.* Despite heavy pressure from their own party and the White House, it seemed like they were standing on principle.
George Will came out with a an article about the HFC. Here is an excerpt that I found interesting:
The caucus is a rarity, a heartening political development: people giving priority to their legislative craft and institution rather than to a president of their party barking at them.
The House Freedom Caucus’s 30-some members, and six others informally affiliated, are barely 8 percent of the House, but their cohesion is a force multiplier. The cohesion comes, Meadows says, from its members being “here for a purpose.” And, he adds dryly, from the fact that, for many, “This is not the best job they’ve ever had.” Among the never-more-than 537 people who are in Washington because they won elections, none are more threatening to tranquility than the few who are not desperate to be here. They do not respond to the usual incentives for maintaining discipline.
The caucus has rules, bylaws and weekly meetings, often featuring experts on particular issues. House Freedom Caucus members have, Meadows believes, “a competitive advantage” in the House because they hone their arguments together in what Meadows calls “the best debating club on Capitol Hill.” If 80 percent of the caucus agree on an issue, it votes as a bloc, although members can receive two exemptions per Congress.
* As opposed to the Democrats who seem to fall in lock step with whatever the leadership tells them to do. I read an article why that may be the case, but that is for another post in the near future.