UPDATED: The 10 House Republicans Most Worthy of a Primary Challenge

In light of the passage of the Dream and Promise Act in the House of Representatives, I have decided to revisit my list of the five House Republicans most worthy of a primary challenge.  By “revisit,” I mean “expand” from a list of the five House Republicans most worthy of a primary challenge to the ten House Republicans most worthy of a primary challenge.  In addition, I will adjust the formula I created, similar to the RAISE Act, which will award points to each House Republican based on votes they have taken that have done or would do harm to the conservative movement.

The original formula called for 20 points for calling for President Trump’s impeachment, 15 points for voting for the Equality Act, ten points for voting against the National Emergency, ten points for voting against wall funding, ten points for scandal-plagued incumbents, five points for voting to condemn the Trump administration’s support for scrapping Obamacare, five points for voting against Kate’s Law, and five points for calling for an increase on the gas tax.  I subtracted 25 points from a House Republican’s score if they represented a district that President Trump either lost or carried with less than 50 points and subtracted five points from an incumbent’s score if they represented a district that President Trump won with between 50 and 55 percent of the vote.  Take a look at the original list:

1.      Justin Amash, MI-3 (40)

2.      Elise Stefanik, NY-21 (25)-tie

3.      Greg Walden, OR-2 (25)-tie

4.      Tom Reed, NY-23 (20)-tie

5.      Fred Upton, MI-6 (20)-tie

6.      Chris Collins, NY-27 (15)

7.      Jim Sensenbrenner, WI-5 (10)

The revised formula contains all of the aforementioned criteria in addition to adding five points for signing a discharge petition that would have forced a House vote on a variety of immigration proposals including an amnesty, five points for writing a letter to Speaker Paul Ryan urging him to create a legislative fix for DACA, five points for voting against the Goodlatte Bill, and five points for voting for the Dream and Promise Act, which would give amnesty to 2.5 million illegal immigrants while doing nothing to address the border crisis.  At least when the previous amnesty, known as the Simpson-Mazzoli Act, became law, lawmakers pretended to care about border security.  Now, they make it clear: they don’t care at all.

Some of the votes I used when calculating scores took place in the 115^th Congress.  A total of 41 House Republicans voted against the Goodlatte Bill, also known as the “Securing America’s Future Act.”  More than half of them do not serve in the 116^th Congress; they either lost re-election or opted to retire. Had the Goodlatte Bill passed, the situation at the border might not have gotten as out of control as it clearly has. As I have explained before, “provisions of the bill call for reducing overall immigration levels by 25 percent, ending chain migration and the diversity visas, authorizing construction of the border wall, mandating E-Verify, defunding sanctuary cities, and passing Kate’s Law.  The bill would allow the DACA recipients to stay in the country but does not give them a “fast track” to a green card, making clear that “recipients may only make use of existing paths to green cards.”

While many of the people who opposed the Goodlate Bill did so because they saw it as too liberal, many others voted against it because they saw it as too conservative. Many of these same people have expressed support for ideas that would exacerbate the illegal immigration problem. Nearly three dozen House Republicans wrote a letter to then-House Speaker Paul Ryan urging him to find a legislative fix for DACA, the executive order put in place by President Obama that shielded 800,000 immigrants brought to the country as children from deportation. A little more than half of these Republicans do not serve in the 116^th Congress. 

Because of his support for impeachment, his refusal to vote for Kate’s Law, his vote against the Goodlatte Bill, his opposition to funding the wall, and his opposition to the President’s declaration of a national emergency, Justin Amash still takes the top spot.  With his score revised to include his votes on the four immigration, Amash winds up with a score of 45.  He would have earned a 50 if not for the fact that his district voted for President Trump with only 52 percent of the vote.  While I have deemed him most worthy of a primary challenger, I also deem him most likely to succumb to a primary challenger; if he even decides to run for re-election at all.

Elise Stefanik has an even worse voting record than Amash; simply calling for impeachment caused his point total to rise above hers.  The third-term Congresswoman from New York’s North Country voted for the Equality Act, voted against the President’s declaration of a national emergency, voted with Democrats to express disapproval of the Trump administration’s support for a legal challenge to Obamacare, signed the discharge petition, and voted against the Goodlatte Bill. Fortunately, she had enough common sense not to vote for the “Dream and Promise Act.”  While she ends up with a score of 40 points, she seems unlikely to face a primary challenger at this point.  Stefanik has already announced her intention to run for re-election, unlike Amash. 

Fred Upton has an absolutely atrocious voting record when it comes to immigration.  He appears to want the border wide open; as he voted against wall funding, voted against President Trump’s declaration of a national emergency, signed the letter to Speaker Ryan, signed the discharge petition, voted against the Goodlatte Bill, and voted the Dream and Promise Act. As an added bonus, he voted with Democrats to condemn the Trump administration’s support for a legal challenge to Obamacare.  Like Stefanik, Upton receives a score of 40 based on my formula. As he will have reached the ripe old age of 67 by Election Day, retirement seems more likely than a primary challenge at this point. 

Tom Reed represents the district that I was born in and that my parents lived and worked in for most of their lives. My personal attachment to his district does not give him a get-out-of-jail free card when it comes to his voting record. In addition to supporting the Equality Act, Reed voted against the Goodlatte Bill, voted with liberals on Obamacare, and signed the discharge petition.  Reed earned a score of 25 based on my formula and he seems unlikely to lose to a primary challenger or even draw one in the first place. 

Greg Walden represents the only Republican district in Oregon and yet his voting record suggests that he represents a liberal district in Massachusetts or Silicon Valley.  Walden voted for the Equality Act in addition to voting against the National Emergency; giving him a score of 25. He does not get a five-point (or 25-point benefit of the doubt) because his district voted solidly Republican in 2016.   

I tried to give the three blue district Republicans the benefit of the doubt since they have to run in districts that Hillary won (although she won with less than 50 percent of the vote in all of them).  Even taking that into account by subtracting 25 points from their scores, Will Hurd and Brian Fitzpatrick still end up with scores of 25.  Hurd represents a district that straddles the border with Mexico while Fitzpatrick represents one of the 100 wealtheist Congressional districts in the United States.  John Katko, who represents Syracuse, just barely missed out on a spot in the top ten; earning a score of ten points. For Hurd and Fitzpatrick, a defeat in the general election seems more likely than a defeat in the primary.  Hurd only held on by a hair in 2018, even though polling showed him crushing his Democratic opponent. 

Chris Collins barely won re-election in the reddest district in New York State last fall. Of all of the people on this list, he probably faces the second highest chance of losing to a primary challenger.  Republicans would probably have a better chance of holding onto the seat if he opts not to run for re-election.  In addition to the cloud of scandal that hangs over Collins’ head, his support for increasing the gas tax and his signature of the discharge petition give him a score of 20. Collins already has a primary challenger.  Like Amash, Collins could lose his primary; although, he might opt to bow out to avoid such a humiliating defeat. 

New Jersey Congressman Chris Smith also earned a score of 20. While Smith deserves a lot of credit for all of his advocacy on behalf of the pro-life movement during his many years in Congress, he has supported legislation that would enable the Democrats to develop a permanent electoral stranglehold that would prevent the pro-life movement from achieving its goals; namely the “Dream and Promise Act.” In addition, Smith signed the letter to Paul Ryan and sided with Democrats on the Obamacare debate. 

Susan Brooks caused her score to skyrocket the second she supported the Equality Act. She would not likely have not even made it into the top 15 had she not voted for that piece of social engineering.  The fact that she represents a district that President Trump won with less than 55 percent of the vote cancels out her decision to sign the letter to Speaker Paul Ryan but she still winds up with a score of 15. 

Like Walden and Collins, Dan Newhouse represents the most Republican district in his state.  Newhouse represents Washington’s 4^th Congressional District, which President Trump won with more than 55 percent of the vote. Yet he still voted against the Goodlatte Bill, signed the letter to Speaker Ryan, and voted for the “Dream and Promise Act.” Big business, as defined in a Washington Post article, appears to have Newhouse in their back pocket. While Newhouse decided not to sign the discharge petition, he only made that decision because House Leadership committed to “bring forward an immigration bill that address agriculture’s labor needs before the August district work period.” As I asked at the time, “did it ever occur to Rep. Newhouse that agriculture’s labor needs directly correlate with the Democratic Party’s voting needs?”    

So, without further ado, take a look at the list of the top ten House Republicans most worthy of a primary challenge. Unlike my previous list, I do not include ties on this one.  As I mentioned when unveiling my original list, if any of these House Republicans make it to the general election (as most of them probably will), please vote for them.  Even a weak Republican beats a Pelosi stooge. 

Top 10 House Republicans worthy of a primary challenge:

1. Justin Amash, MI-3 (45)
2. Elise Stefanik, NY-21 (40)
3. Fred Upton, MI-6 (40)
4. Tom Reed, NY-23 (25)
5. Greg Walden, OR-2 (25)
6. Blue District Republicans (Fitzpatrick, Hurd-25)
7. Chris Collins, NY-27 (20)
8. Chris Smith, NJ-4 (20)
9. Susan Brooks, IN-5 (15)
10. Dan Newhouse, WA-4 (15)

Additions: Chris Smith, Susan Brooks, Dan Newhouse, 2 of 3 Blue District Republicans

Deletion: Jim Sensenbrenner