Developments in the U.S. Republican Party Since the 2020 Election

On November 8, 2023, the Republican Party of the United States hosted its third televised debate for the presidential nomination primary in Miami, Florida. Former President Donald Trump, though absent once again, still maintains a lead in all polls and is even considered highly likely to win the Republican nomination for the third time, to fight Biden again and compete for the White House throne. In fact, over the three years since Trump left office, and Biden came to power, the Republican Party did not get rid of the influence of the political philosophy represented by Trump, and the party’s political ecology and policy agenda inevitably by Trump’s personal influence, presenting a subtle and complex political phenomenon as Trump has never left.

The Heated “Right to Life” Issue Restricts the Republican Party’s Electoral Space

The presidential election of November 3, 2020, which sealed Trump’s defeat and the end of his administration, did not prevent the so-called “Trump legacy” within the framework of the U.S. system from continuing to explode with unpredictable force. A week before the election vote, conservative-leaning Amy Coney Barrett was sworn in to the U.S. Supreme Court, the third Federal Supreme Court justice nominated and seated in Trump’s four years in office. These nominations during Trump’s presidency have rapidly contributed to the conservatization of the Federal Supreme Court and the judicial system as a whole. Influenced by the institutional arrangement of having judges in office for a long period of time, the conservatization of the U.S. judicial system will shape U.S. politics and society for a long time to come.

In recent years, the increasingly conservative Federal Supreme Court has drastically revised many of the civil rights achievements forged by the civil rights movement of the 1950s and 1960s. On June 24, 2022, the Federal Supreme Court’s 5:4 decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization reversed the 1973 decision in Roe v. Wade, which was a de facto overturning of the 1973 decision and denying the “right to choose” principle it had established for the legalization of abortion throughout the U.S., and returning the decision on legalization directly to the states. This “right to life” decision, which emphasizes states’ rights and highlights conservative religious values, fully meets the long-standing political demands of Republicans, especially certain conservative forces.

However, the conservative decision by the Federal Supreme Court soon proved to be significantly beyond the reach of current American society, and for the Republican camp as a whole, it was more of a political agenda that had to be endorsed, but not necessarily benefited from. In the 2022 midterm elections, five months after the decision was announced, the Republican Party did not experience a “red wave” or a “red tsunami” that had been predicted, but at best a “red ripple” that narrowly returned it to the majority in the House of Representatives. One of the key reasons for this is that the denial of the “right to choose” has generated a great deal of concern among American voters, partially curbing the public’s dissatisfaction with the Democratic Party due to the economic downturn. In other words, the “right to life” judgment at that time not only distracted voters from the economy and inflation issues, but also inspired voters’ anxiety and fear about their own civil rights being deprived. As a result, the Republican Party failed to speculate on economic issues and gain a substantial advantage. Thus, as a major breakthrough in the Republican Party’s so-called “culture war” agenda, the “right to life” ruling has reinforced the Democratic Party’s agenda centered on identity politics.

In the face of the coming 2024 election, when economic issues are likely to become the main point of attack for the Republicans against the Democrats, the Democratic camp is attempting to continue to elevate the “right to life” and “right to choose” battles to the forefront of the election agenda in an effort to mobilizing women, youth, and minorities in an attempt to respond to and mobilize the 64% of the population that expressed disappointment with the “right to life” decision, especially moderate central voters. In order to avoid repeating the same mistake, the Republican camp began to try to make some so-called softening and even technical blurring. This seemingly pragmatic blurring of adjustments in fact exposes the limitations of the “culture war” by the Republicans with “white supremacy” as the background color in the trend of historical development.

Deeper Reasons for the Speaker’s “Hard to Produce” Crisis

With the opening of the 118th Congress in January 2023, the Republican Party returned to the majority in the House of Representatives after four years in minority, but dragged down by the “right to life” ruling and other factors, the Republican Party’s majority advantage has been narrowed to less than 10 seats. Such a narrow advantage has directly amplified the differences between the various factions within the Republican Party, especially the ultra-conservatives and the mainstream establishment, which have gained more power during the Trump administration. Under the fragmented party ecology, the U.S. House of Representatives in 2023 has staged two waves of Speaker “hard to produce” crisis.

On January 3rd to 7th, 2023, Kevin McCarthy, the longtime Republican leader of the House of Representatives, finally won the position of Speaker of the House of Representatives after 15 rounds of voting. The price was compromise with the ultra-conservative wing of the party, including House Freedom Caucus. The instability caused by the political compromises was obvious, not only increasing public concern about whether the 118th Congress would be able to resolve major issues such as the debt ceiling, but also ultimately leading to McCarthy becoming the first Speaker of the House of Representatives to be ousted in U.S. history after less than nine months in office. The narrow gap between the Democratic and Republican parties in the chamber in the context of polarization has further strengthened the standoff between the two sides and prompted the extremist factions within each party to become more brazen. If the political impact of Trump’s rise and his election is more manifested in the party ecology, the removal of the Speaker means that this impact has spread to the level of the American political system and government.