Calif. GOP Rep Leaves Republican Party Narrowing House Majority
Rep. Kevin Kiley of California announced Monday that he is leaving the Republican Party and registering as an independent, effective immediately. The move further narrows Speaker Mike Johnson’s already slim two-vote majority in the House and adds another complication to an already challenging governing environment.
Advertisement
Kiley said he plans to continue caucusing with Republicans for “administrative purposes.” The California lawmaker did not notify House Republican leadership before first announcing the change on Friday.
He said he later spoke with Johnson over the weekend about remaining aligned with the Republican conference, but the announcement had already reduced the party’s margin in the chamber.
Kiley described his departure as a response to what he characterized as increasing partisanship in Congress and pointed to recent mid-decade redistricting that altered the boundaries of his Republican-leaning district. During a press call Monday, he cited those factors as part of his decision to change his party affiliation.
“Since gerrymandering seeks to elevate partisanship above everything else in our politics … the best way to counter gerrymandering and its insidious impacts on democracy is simply to take partisanship out of the equation,” he said.
Asked if would continue supporting GOP priorities, Kiley told Axios: “If you’re talking about just bringing bills to the floor, I think, generally speaking, I’ve been supportive of that.”
He then said: “I can’t commit to do that in each and every case, in advance, I think I’ll have to consider every one on its own merits.”
Advertisement
Meanwhile, in the Georgia special election to replace former GOP Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, Republican Clay Fuller and Democrat Shawn Harris advanced Tuesday from a crowded field to an April 7 runoff.
In the firmly Republican district in the northwest corner of the state, Fuller, a district attorney, benefited from President Donald Trump’s support. Greene defeated Harris, a retired U.S. Army brigadier general and cattle rancher, in the 14th District general election of 2024.
Advertisement
Election forecasters predicted that neither candidate would secure a majority required to prevent a run-off election on April 7. Fuller, the GOP candidate, secured 35% of the vote while Harris managed 37% with 99% of the votes counted on Tuesday.
That said, Fuller is the favorite going into the runoff in a district that Trump won by 37 percentage points in the 2024 presidential contest.
Trump weighed in after the race was called and shared several posts on Truth Social praising Fuller, arguing that he would be an “excellent” Republican in Congress for the MAGA movement, and urged Republicans to “finish the job” in the April 7th runoff.
“Congratulations to Clay Fuller, of Georgia’s 14th Congressional District, on getting such a high percentage of the vote with 12 Republicans running. We want to make the next vote ‘TOO BIG TO RIG.’ Clay will be a GREAT Congressman — HE WILL NEVER LET YOU DOWN! President DJT,” the president wrote on his Truth Social.
All candidates, regardless of party, must appear on the same ballot according to Georgia’s special election regulations.
It was improbable that any of the 22 candidates—17 of whom were Republicans—would receive more than 50% of the vote and avoid a runoff.
The campaigns of five Republican candidates who were on the ballot have since ended.
A voter NBC News spoke to on Tuesday cited Trump’s support as a factor in the race.
Sarah Umphrey, 77, said she voted for Fuller, adding that Trump’s endorsement was “really important. I like Trump.”
Assuming Republicans hold the seat and win the April 7th runoff, it would give Speaker Mike Johnson more breathing room in the U.S. House, where Republicans have a slim majority.
Fuller has repeatedly said he would be “a warrior for President Trump on Capitol Hill,” but other Republican candidates have also promised to fully support the president’s plans.
SHOWDOWN ON THE FIVE: Jessica Tarlov Drops Truth Bomb on GOP’s Controversial Voter Legislation
SHOWDOWN ON THE FIVE: Jessica Tarlov Drops Truth Bomb on GOP’s Controversial Voter Legislation
WASHINGTON — A ferocious battle over the soul of American democracy erupted on cable news this week, proving once again that the clash over election integrity is reaching a boiling point.
During a high-stakes segment on Fox News' top-rated program The Five, liberal co-host Jessica Tarlov ignited an intense firestorm by sounding the alarm on the Republican-backed SAVE Act (Safeguard American Voter Eligibility Act).
Her warning was sharp, direct, and unapologetic: This isn't just a simple Voter ID bill—it’s a bureaucratic roadblock designed to keep millions of legal Americans away from the ballot box.
"Far Beyond Voter ID": Tarlov Sounds the Alarm
While GOP proponents frame the SAVE Act as a common-sense measure to restore trust in elections, Tarlov shredded that narrative live on air, dissecting the fine print of the proposed federal mandate.
Under the bill, anyone registering to vote in federal elections would be legally required to provide documentary proof of U.S. citizenship—such as a physical U.S. passport, a certified birth certificate, or naturalization papers.
"People hear 'Voter ID' and think it’s just showing a driver's license at the counter," Tarlov argued. "It’s not. This bill demands physical proof of citizenship upfront. Millions of everyday, hard-working American citizens do not have a valid passport sitting in a drawer or immediate access to an official birth certificate. This creates an artificial barrier to a fundamental constitutional right." without instant paperwork access.
Integrity Guardrail or Voter Suppression? The Great Debate
The fiery television debate reflects a massive political rift tearing through Capitol Hill and statehouses across the country.
The Conservative Defense: Republican sponsors and conservative commentators insist the measure is vital to national security and sovereign elections. They argue that verifying citizenship at registration is a necessary safeguard to prevent non-citizens from ever slipping onto federal voter rolls.
The Progressive Pushback: Critics like Tarlov argue that non-citizen voting in federal elections is already illegal, strictly policed, and exceptionally rare. Opponents caution that adding heavy administrative hurdles will unintentionally disenfranchise lawful voters—particularly students, low-income citizens, rural voters, and women whose names have changed due to marriage.
The Stakes Couldn't Be Higher
As the debate over voter access versus election security intensifies, the SAVE Act has turned into a major political litmus test.
Is requiring physical proof of citizenship a mandatory protection to guarantee that every vote is lawful? Or is it an unnecessary, red-tape nightmare that punishes legal citizens for not having their paperwork in order?
One thing is certain: as long as voices like Jessica Tarlov continue to push back on prime-time television, the fight over who gets to vote—and how hard it is to do so—is far from over.
Jessica Tarlov Says Trump Has 35% Approval Rating in Most Polls
Supporters of the bill strongly disagree, saying it is designed to protect election integrity by preventing non-citizens from registering to vote. Opponents argue the existing safeguards are already sufficient and fear the measure could unintentionally disenfranchise lawful voters. Is the SAVE Act a necessary election safeguard, or does it create unnecessary barriers to voting?
