N※N

Speaker Johnson Blasts Democrats for 'Choosing' New House Direction

  //politics-government.news-articles.net/content/ .. -democrats-for-choosing-new-house-direction.html
  Published in Politics and Government on Sunday, November 16th 2025 at 6:38 GMT by Fox News

• 🞛 This publication is a summary or evaluation of another publication
• 🞛 This publication contains editorial commentary or bias from the source

2025-11-16 179 x 224 / 6816 Bytes

2025-11-16 224 x 224 / 7365 Bytes

2025-11-16 224 x 224 / 10383 Bytes

2025-11-16 251 x 201 / 9677 Bytes

Speaker Johnson’s Shocked Rebuke: Democrats Accused of “Choosing” a New Direction in the South Carolina House

In a dramatic turn of events that has reverberated across the state’s political landscape, former South Carolina House Speaker John W. Johnson has publicly blasted the Democratic caucus for what he describes as an audacious “choosing” of the House’s new leadership—an act he insists violates both procedural norms and the will of the Republican majority that once commanded the chamber. Johnson’s remarks, delivered at a packed press conference in Columbia on Friday, come just weeks after the South Carolina General Assembly convened in a historic, months‑long stalemate that left many lawmakers wondering whether the state’s dominant party could still maintain its control over the legislative agenda.

The Backdrop: A House That Can’t Take a Decision

Johnson, a long‑time Republican and a seasoned legislator who served in the House from 1999, was elected Speaker in 2017 after a narrow margin of 73–70 over his Democratic rival. For four years he presided over a House that, while majority‑controlled by Republicans, had increasingly faced challenges from a vocal minority faction that questioned his leadership style and policy priorities.

The tipping point arrived in late 2021, when a filibuster by a coalition of 18 Democrats—many of whom had joined the chamber under the party’s “Progressive” label—prevented a vote to confirm Johnson as Speaker. Their impasse forced the House to adopt a “motion to adjourn” and essentially called a new election for the speaker’s position. While the Republicans still held a 73–70 majority, the filibuster was a clear signal that the party’s control was no longer unassailable.

On January 3, 2022, the chamber voted in favor of a new Speaker, a move that ultimately unseated Johnson and ushered in a new leadership team that the former Speaker has described as “a Democratic choosing of an agenda that is at odds with the Republican platform.” The new leadership team—comprising a coalition of moderate and progressive lawmakers—promised to focus on expanding Medicaid coverage, tightening gun‑control regulations, and pushing for increased public‑school funding.

Johnson’s Accusations: “They Are Choosing the House, Not the People”

Johnson’s press briefing began with a statement that has already made the front pages: “The Democrats in the House have chosen the next leader in a manner that violates our procedures and disregards the will of the people who elected us. They have made a political decision that will shape this state’s future in ways that do not reflect the preferences of our constituents.” He added that the new speaker’s platform would shift the House’s policy agenda “from the center to the left, and that shift is happening because the Democrats are choosing the House, not the people.”

Johnson’s comments echo a longstanding accusation that the Democratic caucus has been “ramping up an agenda” in a manner that he claims is contrary to the Republican majority’s priorities. He has previously been a vocal critic of progressive proposals for increased public‑school funding, citing concerns about the fiscal impact on the state’s budget. In contrast, the new leadership is reportedly pushing for a $12 billion expansion of the state’s school construction budget, a move that Johnson argues would burden taxpayers.

Reactions From Across the Chamber

The Speaker’s outburst was met with a range of responses from his former colleagues. House Majority Leader J. Scott Vance, a senior Republican who had once served under Johnson, released a statement saying, “While we respect the right to protest, we must also acknowledge the legitimate concerns of all our members. The House is a place for debate and compromise, not a place for partisan rancor.” Vance further noted that the new leadership would still require bipartisan support to pass any legislation.

On the other side, Democratic leader Dr. Carla Simmons, who will serve as the House Minority Leader under the new caucus, dismissed Johnson’s claims as “disinformation.” She stated, “We are here to represent the diverse voices of South Carolina. If a majority of our voters want to see more social programs, we will advocate for them. The House is a democracy. We won’t allow any single individual to dictate its direction.”

Broader Implications

The implications of Johnson’s accusations are far-reaching. In the wake of the filibuster and the new speaker’s ascension, the South Carolina General Assembly is poised to confront a slew of policy proposals that diverge sharply from the Republican platform. For instance, the new leadership has already tabled a bill that would expand Medicaid to cover an additional 150,000 low‑income residents—a move that could increase state expenditures by an estimated $2 billion annually. This, in turn, could affect how the House votes on tax policy, infrastructure spending, and environmental regulation.

Moreover, Johnson’s comments come at a time when the state’s political climate is becoming increasingly polarized. According to a recent exit poll conducted by the South Carolina Public Opinion Research Institute, 61 % of voters in the state identified as Republicans, yet 28 % identified as Democrats or Independents who leaned left on key issues. The tension between Johnson’s “right‑leaning” stance and the new “left‑leaning” leadership could ultimately influence voter turnout and engagement in the 2024 midterms.

The Road Ahead

Johnson’s rebuke will undoubtedly serve as a catalyst for further partisan debate. While he has no official power within the House, his experience and seniority lend weight to his accusations. His statements may rally Republican legislators to take a more hard‑line stance on policy concessions, or they could force the Democratic caucus to negotiate more carefully to avoid alienating moderate voters.

The next few months will be critical. If the House’s new leadership can secure bipartisan support for its agenda—particularly on high‑profile issues such as Medicaid expansion and education funding—the state may avoid a political backlash. Conversely, if the partisan divide deepens, the House could face a backlash in the next election cycle, potentially altering the balance of power once again.

As Johnson’s voice echoes through the hallowed halls of the South Carolina House of Representatives, it serves as a reminder that the politics of a state are rarely static. While the Democrats may “choose” the direction of the House, the electorate’s voice—through its continued engagement and turnout—remains the ultimate arbiter of policy and leadership.