A majority in the House of Representatives could provide Donald Trump with the necessary power to cement some of his most ambitious policy plans—or could serve as a critical check on his worst impulses.
The steady erosion of power from the legislative branch to the executive over several decades means the congressional majority is less important than it ought to be. Still, the one remaining piece of the 2024 election puzzle is a big prize, and as of Wednesday afternoon, it remains unsettled. The results in the few handfuls of yet-to-be-called House races will set the stage for next year's huge fiscal policy showdown—the most important piece of which is the expiration of some of the tax cuts passed during Trump's first term—and will similarly affect Trump's supposed plans to cut $2 trillion from the federal budget.
More on that in a moment. First, let's check the scoreboard. As of 3:30 p.m. on Wednesday, The New York Times had called 200 House races for Republicans and 183 for Democrats, with 52 races still undetermined. The Associated Press, meanwhile, had Republicans ahead 201-186 and 48 still too close to call. Remember: it takes 218 seats to have a majority in the chamber.
On the heels of Trump's win and a GOP takeover of the U.S. Senate on Tuesday night, it might feel like a Republican majority in the House is a foregone conclusion. That's not necessarily true, as congressional races are sometimes decided by a combination of goofy gerrymandering and local issues that defy national trends. In the district where I live—Virginia's 7th district, which remains undecided—most of the ads in the final days of the election focused on how one candidate had faked having a family for a photo op, while the other allegedly lied about his military service. These things get weird.
Still, it's obvious from the numbers that Democrats are walking a very narrow path to victory at the moment.
The size of a prospective Republican majority will matter too—will it be, as Nate Silver put it, a "functional GOP majority vs. dysfunctional GOP majority." We've seen in the past few years how a slim majority can hand outsized power to small factions. Yes, the rabble-rousers in the Republican conference might have less of an incentive to act out with Trump in the White House and a Republican majority in the Senate, but the difference between a three-seat majority and a 10-seat majority could have big implications for even the most basic of legislative tasks, like choosing a speaker and passing a budget.
It will be days, possibly longer, before all the results of the closest House results are known.
In a healthier republic, we'd all be sitting on pins and needles to see the results in the Iowa 1st, the Pennsylvania 8th, the Virginia 7th, and so on. Control of the House ought to be the biggest prize in any election cycle since Congress is constitutionally the most powerful branch of the federal government and the House is the portion of Congress most directly responsive to the people.
That is, obviously, not the world we are currently inhabiting.
And, indeed, control of Congress probably won't matter when it comes to much of the agenda that Trump has outlined for a second term. He will have broad power to unilaterally set tariffs and impose other barriers to trade, via the Department of Commerce and the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative. His mass deportation plan and other immigration-restricting policies could be implemented by executive order and carried out by the Department of Homeland Security and the Border Patrol. If Trump follows through on his threats to go after unfriendly media outlets (perhaps by targeting their broadcast licenses), he'll be able to rely on appointees at the Federal Communications Commission to do the dirty work. And, as the Biden administration amply demonstrated, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) can flex broad and vague powers over many aspects of the economy and the decisions of private businesses (in ways that some of Trump's allies have applauded).
The one big thing that does still depend on Congress is the annual federal budget—or at least the continuing resolutions and omnibus bills that are substituted for it every year—and questions about where the government gets its tax revenue.
Those issues will matter more than usual next year, since large portions of the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) are set to expire at the end of 2025. Unless Congress extends the lower individual tax rates set by the TCJA, virtually all tax-paying Americans will face a tax increase in 2026. Of course, extending those tax cuts should come with offsetting spending cuts, which Congress will have to determine. And with Trump's ally Elon Musk promising to cut $2 trillion from the federal budget, congressional appropriators might have a very busy year ahead.
A Republican majority in both chambers of Congress means Trump will have a free hand to pursue an aggressive overhaul of the federal budget and tax code, just like he did early in his first term. Even without 60 votes in the Senate, Republicans should be able to use the reconciliation process to achieve their aims on taxes and spending.
But keep in mind: the last time they had that opportunity, Trump oversaw a huge increase in spending that piled up more debt. One-party control of government is not generally a recipe for fiscal restraint, no matter what is promised on the campaign trail.
A narrow Democratic majority in the House would certainly complicate the debate over what to do with the expiring portions of the TCJA. It would also provide Democrats with the ability to cut off funding for parts of Trump's agenda and to conduct investigations and oversight hearings that might limit any abuses of power.
That's why the remaining House races might end up being some of the most important aspects of this year's election—even if they weren't on your radar last night.
The post The House Is Democrats' Best Chance To Check Trump's Executive Powers appeared first on Reason.com.
