Author: The Hill

A Russian missile strike over the weekend at an apartment complex in the southeastern Ukrainian city of Dnipro exposed a weakness in Ukraine’s air defenses, just as many fear more brutal Russian attacks are on the horizon.

The Dnipro strike killed 45 people, including six children, and injured another 79 people in one of the most devastating attacks on Ukraine’s civilian population since Moscow’s invasion nearly a year ago.

Russia has targeted critical infrastructure and energy grids in Ukraine with strikes since October, hoping to cow the Ukrainian people into submission after facing numerous setbacks in the war.

In the Dnipro strike, however, Ukraine says it was completely unable to stop the missile that hit the apartment complex because it lacked the defense capabilities to intercept it.

The deadly incident, just days after the Kremlin’s appointment of a new commander to oversee the war, is leading to concerns that a more desperate Russia will increasingly carry out such strikes and Ukraine will struggle to defend against them.

Gian Gentile, the associate director of the nonprofit Rand Corporation’s Arroyo Center, predicted Russia will keep up the strikes as it prepares to launch a potential ground offensive in coming months.

Gentile said he could not speak with finality on Russian intent, but he believes the Kremlin is “at the point now where they are intentionally killing civilians” to turn them against the government.

“They may be moderating between going after infrastructure and power nodes” and civilian areas, he added. ”But they are following a playbook that lots of other countries have taken in war — and that is to punish the civilian population.”

After the strike, a Kremlin spokesperson said Russia does not target residential areas and falsely attributed blame for the attack on Ukrainian air defenses, according to the Kyiv Post.

The U.K. Defense Ministry said the Dnipro strike was part of a weekend barrage of missiles targeting power grids and not a direct assault on the multistory apartment complex, noting the Kh-22 missile used in the Jan. 14 attack is “notoriously inaccurate.”

Ukrainian officials on Monday said they do not possess a defense system capable of downing Russia’s Kh-22s, a Soviet-era long-range missile designed to strike ships and aircraft. Ukraine’s Air Force Command said in a Facebook post that Russia has fired more than 210 of the missiles since the war began and Ukraine has shot down none of them.

According to analysts, Kyiv is physically capable of shooting the missiles down, but they are extremely hard to track. The Kh-22 can reach more than 3,000 mph once fired from Russia’s Tu-22M3 bomber planes.

The missile type, equipped with a conventional warhead, has been used in past strikes, including one on a shopping mall in the city of Kremenchuk in June that killed around 20 people.

Yuriy Sak, an adviser to Ukraine’s defense secretary, said Kyiv needs the Patriot missile defense system or a SAMP-T, a defense system co-owned by France and Italy, to effectively take the missiles down.

The U.S. and Germany are each providing Ukraine with one Patriot defense system, and American troops are training Ukrainian personnel on the missile system at Fort Sill in Oklahoma.

But Sak said Ukraine will undoubtedly need more of the Patriots.

“It’s a question of quantity because Ukraine is a large country,” Sak told The Hill. “To protect Ukrainian cities, we will need to continue to work with our partners to get more of these systems.”

Others cautioned that while more air defense systems were good, they can only do so much, arguing Ukraine also has to be effective in responding to the attacks.

Konstantin Sonin, a professor in the School of Public Policy at the University of Chicago, said there were indications Russia may have modified its missiles or launched the attack from an unclear direction, further stymying Ukraine.

“In this attack, the air defense was extremely unsuccessful,” he said. “I think they’re extremely busy trying to figure out how it was done.”

Russia is reportedly running low on ammunition and inventory, leading to questions regarding if the Kremlin has the ability to continue the strikes.

But Sak said Russia is continuing to produce more missiles, and with its existing stockpile, the Kremlin could “at any given moment” conduct two or three mass strikes.

That evidence is also supported by other analysts, who estimate Russia could continue the attacks with the current munitions supply through at least the summer.

The Dnipro attack led to an outpouring of grief from Ukraine, even in a country already beleaguered by war and death.

Noting the sheer number of civilian deaths, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky said in a Monday evening address that Ukraine is “doing everything to strengthen our air defense as much as possible.”

“What happened in Dnipro, the fact that Russia is preparing a new attempt to seize the initiative in the war, the fact that the nature of hostilities at the front requires new decisions in the defense supply,” he said, “all this only emphasizes how important it is to coordinate our efforts — efforts of all members of the coalition to defend Ukraine and freedom.”

Harvard University Medical School is withdrawing from U.S. News & World Report’s annual rankings of top medical schools in the country based on “philosophical” issues with the list. 

Dean George Daley said in a message to members of the medical school community on Tuesday that he recognizes the issues educational leaders have had with the methodology that the rankings use to evaluate schools, but the decision is based on the “principled belief that rankings cannot meaningfully reflect the high aspirations for educational excellence, graduate preparedness, and compassionate and equitable patient care that we strive to foster in our medical education programs.” 

He said rankings create “perverse” incentives for academic institutions to report misleading or inaccurate data, set policies designed to raise their rankings instead of other objectives and divert financial aid toward high-performing students instead of those with a financial need. 

“Ultimately, the suitability of any particular medical school for any given student is too complex, nuanced, and individualized to be served by a rigid ranked list, no matter the methodology,” Daley said. 

The decision comes as U.S. News & World Report has faced criticism from several academic institutions, including Harvard Law School, over its system of ranking universities’ programs. 

Harvard and Yale’s law schools both announced in November that they would end their participation in the rankings. They attacked the rankings’ methodology, noting that it includes how much debt students have, and said it disincentivizes providing need-based financial aid.

A few other law schools have joined them in withdrawing from the rankings.

U.S. News said earlier this month that it will make changes to how it ranks law schools, including placing less emphasis on peer assessment reviews and more on schools offering fellowships to students pursuing public service. 

U.S. News Executive Chairman and CEO Eric Gertler has said the rankings are intended to help students make the “best decision” for where to attend law school. 

But Daley said his priority is not to receive a top ranking but to focus on the “quality and richness of the educational experience” at the medical school, encouraging personal growth and “lifelong learning.” 

He said the “bold and courageous” moves from the dean of Harvard’s law school and peer law schools led him to take this action in ending the medical school’s participation in the rankings. 

He said the school will continue to publicly share key information about itself on its admissions website in the interest of transparency and accountability. He noted that applicants can compare schools’ data in a “raw, unweighted form” on the Association of American Medical Colleges website. 

“We trust these resources will prove valuable for students as they make thoughtful and meaningful decisions about which medical school is the best fit for them,” Daley said.

Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Mark Milley for the first time met with his Ukrainian counterpart in person on Tuesday, traveling to an undisclosed site in Poland near the Ukrainian border.

We’ll share how the meeting happened and what was discussed. Plus: Details on the Patriot missile system training Ukrainian troops have begun in Oklahoma, and experts weigh in on Russia’s military leadership changeup in its war against Ukraine.

This is Defense & National Security, your guide to the latest developments at the Pentagon, on Capitol Hill and beyond. For The Hill, I’m Ellen Mitchell. Subscribe here.

US, Ukraine military chiefs meet near Polish border

Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Mark Milley on Tuesday met for a few hours with Ukraine’s chief military officer, Gen. Valerii Zaluzhnyi, after taking a car from a Polish base to an unnamed location near the Ukrainian border, the Pentagon confirmed. 

The discussion: The two “discussed the unprovoked and ongoing Russian invasion of Ukraine and exchanged perspectives and assessments,” Army Col. Dave Butler, a spokesman for Milley, said in a statement. “The Chairman reaffirmed unwavering support for Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity.”  

Zaluzhnyi also announced the meeting on Twitter, writing that he extended his “gratitude for the unwavering support & assistance provided by [the United States] & allies to [Ukraine]” and “outlined the urgent needs of the [Armed Forces of Ukraine] which will accelerate our Victory.” 

The significance: The two generals’ get-together marks a symbolic show of support as Washington and the international community ramp up the delivery of lethal aid to Kyiv. The West as of late has pledged Patriot missile defense systems, tanks and other new weapons to the embattled country as it struggles to regain control of territory taken by Russian forces in the east and deal with a near-constant barrage of Kremlin drone and missile strikes.   

Timing: The meeting also comes as the war nears the end of its first year, with Russian forces, along with thousands of private Wagner Group contractors, appearing to dig in for the long haul. Moscow on Tuesday also announced an effort to grow its military to 1.5 million troops over the next several years.   

Butler told reporters traveling with Milley that the two generals thought it was important to meet face-to-face, according to The Associated Press. 

The setup: Butler added that after it became clear Zaluzhnyi would not be able to travel to Brussels later this week for a meeting of NATO and other defense chiefs, he and Milley made alternate plans to meet in Poland.  

The group traveling to the meeting was kept small — just Milley and six of his senior staffers — with the conversation focused on new U.S. training of Ukrainian forces in Germany as well as to gather Zaluzhnyi’s concerns to then relay the information to other military leaders at the NATO meeting.   

Up next: Milley now plans to travel to Brussels, where he will participate in high-level NATO meetings on Wednesday and Thursday, followed by a gathering of the Ukraine Contact Group at Ramstein Air Base in Germany on Thursday and Friday.  

Read the full story here 

Ukrainian troops begin Patriot missile training in US

Ukrainian troops have arrived at Fort Sill, Okla., and started training on the Patriot missile system, the Pentagon’s top spokesperson confirmed Tuesday.  

“Training has begun … that training will last for several months and train upwards of 90 to 100 Ukrainians on use of the Patriot missile system,” press secretary Brig. Gen. Pat Ryder told reporters.   

The location: Fort Sill — home to the Fires Center of Excellence and Patriot training for U.S. troops and forces from other countries — a day earlier announced that the Ukrainian troops had arrived at the Army base.   

“The same instructors who teach U.S., allied and partner nations will conduct the Ukrainian training, and these classes will not detract from the ongoing training missions at Fort Sill,” according to a statement from the base. 

Speed up: Ryder last week said that training on the advanced long-range air defense system is expected to take “several months.” Patriot instruction typically takes up to a year, but defense officials are aiming to speed up the timeline for the Ukrainians. 

Training elsewhere: The start of Patriot training in Oklahoma coincides with the kickoff of an expanded U.S. training program for Ukrainian troops in Germany. 

Read that story here

EXPERTS SEE ‘DESPERATION’ IN PUTIN’S WAR LEADERSHIP SHUFFLE

Russian President Vladimir Putin’s “flailing” decision this month to name a new leader for his invasion of Ukraine reflects a growing sense of desperation for the Kremlin, U.S. experts say.   

The appointment of Gen. Valery Gerasimov, the former chief of Russia’s general staff, as overall commander of the country’s so-called special military operation has global watchers increasingly dubious of Putin’s wartime strategy following a series of embarrassing battlefield losses since summer.   

A coming escalation?: But the switch-up, which included the demotion of Gen. Sergey Surovikin, head of the invasion since October, could also indicate a coming escalation of Russia’s brutal war tactics.   

“My sense is that Putin is flailing because he’s not getting what he wants,” former U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine William Taylor told The Hill. 

“His military is failing. He’s trying to shake things up in order to get a better outcome, and that’s not the problem. … His military is not capable of doing what he wants for all kinds of institutional, historical, corruption, competence reasons, and shaking up the command structure, I don’t think it is going to get him what he wants.” 

Read the rest here 

ON TAP FOR TOMORROW

• Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin will travel to Germany ahead of Friday’s meeting of the Ukraine Defense Contact Group 
• Army Chief of Staff Gen. James McConville will speak in person at an Association of the U.S. Army “Coffee Series” event at 6:30 a.m.   
• The Center for Strategic and International Studies will discuss ocean security challenges at 9 a.m. 
• The Hudson Institute will host a virtual discussion on “Enhancing Cybersecurity, Information Security, and Industrial Security as the Foundation for Japan’s Defense Transformation,” at 10 a.m.  
• The Navy Memorial will hold a virtual talk with Navy Chief of Chaplains Rear Adm. Gregory Todd at 1 p.m.  
• The Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law will host a discussion on “Secret War: Unauthorized Combat and Legal Loopholes,” at 3 p.m.  
• The Institute of World Politics will hold a seminar on “Foreign Leaders Analysis: A Profile of Xi Jinping,” at 5 p.m.

WHAT WE’RE READING

OP-EDS IN THE HILL

That’s it for today! Check out The Hill’s Defense and National Security pages for the latest coverage. See you tomorrow!

Former NATO chief James Stavridis said in an interview that he believes Russian forces in Ukraine will be “burned through and exhausted” by the end of the winter season as the Kremlin’s war against the neighboring country continues. 

During an appearance on New York-based radio station WABC 770 morning show “Cats Roundtable,” Stavridis told host John Catsimatidis that he doesn’t see either side having a breakthrough moment during the winter.

“But I don’t see either side having a breakthrough moment — at least this winter,” Stavridis told Catsimatidis. “Unfortunately, the first chance we can get to a negotiation is going to be after the winter. The Russians will be burned through and exhausted, losing so many men, so much equipment.”

Stavridis also said he believes both sides will push for negotiations in the latter part of this year.

“On the Ukrainian side, the pressures from the West, in order to avoid further costs, is going to become significant,” Stavridis added. “When I put it all together, more war to go. Ukrainians win it on the ground. Russians winning in the skies.”

“Let’s all push for a negotiation sometime mid-2023,” he concluded. 

Stavridis’s remarks come as Ukrainian Ambassador to the U.S. Oksana Markarova said on Sunday that the billions of dollars provided by the U.S. in an effort to support their counterattack toward Russia have been put to good use. 

Congress last month passed a $1.7 trillion government funding package that includes $45 billion for Ukraine and other allies of NATO. Some prominent GOP lawmakers have been public about their displeasure with the continuing aid to the sovereign country amid the conflict. 

“Every U.S. dollar that is given to us, we’re putting it to a good use,” Markarova said on CBS’s “Face The Nation.” “We’re using it as an investment into our joint fight for democracy.”

Sen. Angus King (I-Maine) on Sunday called the type of fighting happening in east Ukraine “essentially trench warfare” just days after he met with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky in Kyiv.

King, who is a member of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence and the Armed Services Committee, told CBS “Face the Nation” moderator Margaret Brennan that $3 billion being released by the Biden administration to help Ukraine will assist in its efforts to stave off a Russian offensive.

“I mean, they’re just being pummeled. That’s too mild a word in terms of their energy infrastructure. So air defenses part of it, Patriot missiles. But also what’s going on in the east is essentially trench warfare. It’s almost World War One. It’s horrible,” King said.

King, joined by Sen. Jack Reed (D-R.I.), was in Ukraine on Friday both to show solidarity with Ukrainians and also to exercise “accountability” of U.S. funding in the country.

The Biden administration announced on Friday a $3.75 billion military assistance package to send new equipment to Ukraine, including artillery systems, armored personnel carriers, surface to air missiles and ammunition.

King said such vehicles will help Ukrainians have a “fighting chance” to win the war.

“And to put it in perspective for Americans, it’s as if our East Coast, from Maine to Florida and then west to Houston, Texas, was being occupied by a foreign power,” King said.

“The entire eastern edge of Ukraine is occupied,” King added. “And that’s where this fight is going to be. And that’s why these maneuver vehicles are going to be so important.”

This new package for Ukraine is the 29th installment of U.S. arms and equipment for the country since August 2021. Other allies, like France and Germany have also announced that they will send armored vehicles to Ukraine in support of its war efforts.

Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) was elected Speaker of the House early Saturday morning, after weeks of haggling and a historic 15 roll call votes on the floor.

The lengthy Speakership fight — the first in a century to go past one ballot — played out largely in front of the public, as members repeatedly voted and sometimes negotiated on the floor of the House before C-SPAN’s cameras.

The battle for Speaker, particularly its culmination on Friday night and Saturday morning, produced a number of memorable moments. Here are five of the most dramatic and colorful:

Republicans rush back to Washington

Two Republican congressmen — Reps. Ken Buck (R-Colo.) and Wesley Hunt (R-Texas) — rushed back to the Capitol on Friday to vote for McCarthy.

Buck had said he would return for Friday evening votes after being gone during the day for a “non-emergency medical procedure” he had to undergo back in his home state.

But Hunt had to change his plans. He returned home to Texas Friday morning to spend time with his wife and newborn son, who was born prematurely on Monday and spent time in the neonatal intensive care unit.

“Willie needs his father and Emily needs her husband,” Hunt said in a tweet. “Today, I’ll be returning home to hold my son and be at my wife’s side. It’s my intention to get back into the fight as soon as possible.”

Both were McCarthy supporters and McCarthy’s Speaker math meant he needed both of their votes to prevail.

Hunt flew back to Washington later Friday and was in the chamber in time to vote the first time his name was called, while Buck arrived in time to vote when they circled back to his name.

Both received a round of applause from their Republican colleagues.

Lawmaker physically restrained by colleague

Perhaps the more tense — and chaotic — moment of the night came after McCarthy lost his 14th Speakership vote, one Republicans were confident would be their last.

Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.) was among the last lawmakers to vote and because only one of the other five holdout Republicans — Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-Colo.) — had changed their vote to “present,” a “present” vote from Gaetz wouldn’t be enough to put McCarthy over the finish. McCarthy needed an affirmative vote from the Florida Republican.

Gaetz voted “present.”

With tensions rising, a heated argument broke out between Gaetz and several McCarthy backers and Rep. Mike Rogers (R-Ala.) appeared to take a step toward Gaetz before he was physically pulled back by Rep. Richard Hudson (R-N.C.), eliciting gasps in the chamber.

Greene gets Trump on the line

As chaos ensued between then 14th and 15th votes, Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) had President Trump on the phone in an effort to whip the final votes for McCarthy.

A widely-circulated photo from Friday night showed Greene holding up her phone to Rep. Matt Rosendale (R-Mont.), one the last six Republican holdouts. Rosendale appeared to refuse the phone call, whose caller ID read “DT.”

Greene later confirmed to The Hill that the phone call was in fact from Trump. 

“It was the perfect phone call,” she added in a post on Twitter, a reference to Trump’s comment about the phone call at the center of his first impeachment.

Trump also reportedly called other Republican holdouts on behalf of McCarthy and McCarthy credited Trump for helping him win the 15th ballot.

Republicans rush to stay in session after McCarthy apparently locks down votes

With Republicans seemingly at an impasse after a 14th failed vote, Rep. Patrick McHenry (R-N.C.) moved to adjourn the House until Monday. 

The motion seemed to have enough GOP support to pass, but then McCarthy and other Republicans rushed to the dais to their change votes and stay in session.

McCarthy had seemingly locked down the votes he needed.

Several Republican lawmakers chanted “one more time” in anticipation of what would be the 15th and final ballot. With all six Republican holdouts changing their vote to “present,” McCarthy was able to secure the Speakership with 216 votes just after midnight on Saturday.  

Democrats troll their Republican colleagues

As Republican infighting continued throughout the week, Democrats watched with a level of amusement, frequently mocking their GOP counterparts.

Several Democratic members brought out buckets of popcorn amid the drawn-out process.

“We are breaking the popcorn out in the Dem Caucus till the Republicans get their act together,” Rep. Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.) said in a Twitter post on Tuesday, accompanied by a picture of large bucket of popcorn.

Rep. Katie Porter (D-Calif.) was seen during Friday’s votes sitting and reading “The Subtle Art of Not Giving a F—” by Mark Manson.

After McCarthy clinched the Speakership on Saturday morning, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) also appeared to take a jab at the Republican conference, calling it an honor to “finally” welcome members to the 118th Congress.

He got the gavel.

Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) became the 55th Speaker of the House in the midnight hour on Saturday, ending a historic four-day, 15-ballot stalemate caused by a group of 20 hardline conservative members — and fulfilling the California Republican’s longtime goal.

The final vote, on the 15th ballot, was 216 for McCarthy, 212 for House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.), and six present votes. With the present votes, he needed 215 votes to win.

McCarthy’s securing of the Speakership came after a dramatic scene on the House floor on the 14th ballot, with Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.) casting the deciding vote that put McCarthy just one vote shy of the gavel. 

Members huddled around Gaetz in intense discussion after the vote. At one point, Rep. Mike Rogers (R-Ala.) went up to the group in anger, and Rep. Richard Hudson (R-N.C.) physically pulled Rogers back.

Republicans were about to adjourn until Monday — until Gaetz approached McCarthy, asking for one more vote. On that ballot, all remaining holdouts flipped to vote present so he would win.

It is a major victory for McCarthy. There were points where many outside observers — and even privately some of his House GOP supporters — did not think he was going to be able to pull it off.

He proved them wrong.

Rep. Patrick McHenry (R-N.C.), a longtime friend of McCarthy, said in one of the final nominating speeches that he had “a front-row seat as he’s grown as a leader — and especially this week, as he’s grown as a leader.” 

“He’s relentless. The man does not quit,” McHenry said of McCarthy. 

Before becoming Speaker, though, McCarthy had to listen.

As far back as July, hardliners in the conservative House Freedom Caucus had started making demands to change House rules to weaken the power of leadership; increase the number of right-flank members in key positions; stay out of open Republican primaries; and take a more aggressive stance toward the Biden administration, Democrats and the Senate.

Midterm elections proved disappointing for Republicans, handing them a far slimmer majority than McCarthy had long predicted. That gave hardliners leverage. Five key detractors signaled early on that they would not vote for McCarthy, while several others withheld support as they pushed for rules changes and commitments. For a few of those holdouts, the opposition appeared to be personal.

Compromises offered over New Year’s weekend did not appease them, and posturing from McCarthy supporters to persist through ballot after ballot did not sway them.

The Speaker race looked to be heading for a repeat of history. Objections from members of the House Freedom Caucus had forced McCarthy to bow out of his first Speakership bid in 2015, when he ran to replace a resigning Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio).

McCarthy was not going to let that happen again. He vowed to never bow out of the race, steadfast even after days of multiple failed ballots.

The GOP Leader and his allies — including McHenry, Rep. French Hill (R-Ark.) and Majority Whip Tom Emmer (R-Minn.) — worked furiously to reach an agreement with the detractors as McCarthy failed the ninth, 10th and 11th ballots on the floor. Negotiations with holdouts like House Freedom Caucus Chair Scott Perry (R-Pa.) and Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas) lasted late into the night on Thursday.

He gave them what they wanted – or most of it, at least.

Concessions include lowering the threshold for forcing a vote on ousting the Speaker to just one member; creating a select subcommittee on “weaponization of the federal government”; and agreeing to hold a vote on term limits. The Congressional Leadership Fund, a PAC aligned with McCarthy, also agreed not to spend money in open-seat primaries in safe Republican districts.

When the House returned at noon Friday, McCarthy showcased his momentum, flipping a total of 14 of the detractors to support him on the 12th and 13th ballots.

Reps. Ken Buck (R-Colo.) and freshman Rep. Wesley Hunt (R-Texas), who were absent earlier in the day, rushed back to Washington for the final ballot to help McCarthy get over the finish line. Buck had been gone due to a medical procedure, and Hunt had traveled back to Texas to be with his premature newborn son and his wife, who suffered non-life threatening complications that put her in the hospital.

The drawn-out Speakership fight makes history as the fifth-longest by number of ballots, and the single longest since before the Civil War. It is the first time that the Speaker vote went to multiple ballots since 1923.

“I think over the last several months, and over the last several years, [McCarthy] has shown how he’s going to do [manage the conference],” said Rep. Mike Bost (R-Ill.), McCarthy supporter. “He brings people together. He is able to unite people you wouldn’t think would be united.”

But McCarthy will likely have more challenges ahead as he manages a wide range of ideologies with weakened power.

Ahead of the final Speaker vote, Rep. Tony Gonzales (R-Texas), a member of the bipartisan Problem Solvers Caucus, said he would vote against the House Rules package. His stance points to potential dysfunction in Congress even after it elects a Speaker.

“I am a NO on the house rules package. Welcome to the 118th Congress,” he tweeted Friday evening.

Other Republicans were quietly growing frustrated with McCarthy bending so much to the will of his detractors rather than to the swing-district members who handed him the majority, multiple sources said.

The date on which he secured the gavel marked two years since another pivotal moment for McCarthy: the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol.

That day, McCarthy yelled at former President Donald Trump on the phone as rioters breached the building.Later that night he voted against certifying election results from Pennsylvania. In the aftermath, he said Trump bore responsibility for the attack. Then he helped to rehabilitate Trump’s stature in the GOP by meeting with him at Mar-a-Lago before the end of the month.

In his Speakership bid, Trump endorsed the GOP Leader and called the holdouts to lobby for McCarthy.

A massive fundraiser and savvy campaign tactician, McCarthy has long shown a willingness to bend to the political winds. In his memoir, Boehner recalled McCarthy – as the House Majority Whip in 2013 – voting with House Majority Leader Eric Cantor against a “fiscal cliff” tax deal that he had whipped to ensure it would pass. He could see the growing anti-government Tea Party sentiment in his party.

As Minority Leader, McCarthy has elevated and empowered members of the right flank who helped push Boener to resign the Speakership. Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), who once ran against McCarthy to lead House Republicans, is set to chair the House Judiciary Committee. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.), who previously cast doubt on whether McCarthy could become Speaker, became one of his fiercest supporters in his battle for the gavel.

In October, McCarthy told Punchbowl News that if he did not win the Speakership, it was “not God’s plan for me to be speaker.”

McCarthy may have gotten an answer to his prayers – just not in the way he likely envisioned.

Damar Hamlin’s tragic gridiron collapse underscores a longstanding societal dilemma over a game that, however deeply engrained in American culture, might just be too dangerous to play. 

Participation in tackle football among children has been slipping for years amid mounting safety concerns. The signal moment in that decline was probably the release of a 2017 study that examined the brains of 111 deceased NFL players and found a degenerative disease in all but one. Together with a landmark 2013 book and a 2015 Will Smith film, the Boston study seeded public awareness of chronic traumatic encephalopathy (CTE), inspired reforms and sent thousands of families searching for safer sports. 

Head injuries may get the most ink, but football poses a risk to many parts of the human body, including the heart. Hamlin, a 24-year-old safety on the Buffalo Bills, suffered cardiac arrest and collapsed on the field Monday night after tackling an opponent. Doctors restarted his heart on national television.  

Fortunately, Hamlin was sufficiently recovered by week’s end to FaceTime with his teammates.  

Even so, his high-profile injury has reignited debate over the fundamental safety of a game that, even after a century of progress in protective equipment and medical protocols, still requires its participants to crash into each other.  

More than 1.5 million children play tackle football. Surveys suggest they and their families know the risks, as well as the reforms, and believe the game can be played safely. Colliding heads and concussions are becoming less common.  

“I think it’s frankly as safe as it’s ever been for a kid to play,” said Bruce Howard, a spokesman for the National Federation of State High School Associations, a rulemaking body for high-school sports.   

But the helmeted ranks are thinning. Participation in high-school football declined from 1.1 million students in 2008 to 973,000 in 2022, Howard said. Among children ages 6 to 12, tackle football participation has dropped by nearly 40 percent in the same span, according to the Aspen Institute.  

Lawmakers in several states have even proposed measures to ban tackle football for younger children. None of the initiatives has passed.  

“Football’s not going away, and I don’t think that it should,” said Mariah Warner, a doctoral candidate and football researcher at the Ohio State University, and a lifelong New England Patriots fan. “I want to watch quality, safe football. But I don’t think that means 7-year-olds should be tackling each other with metal helmets on.” 

The societal retreat from tackle football in the preteen and tween years arises from two brain research findings.  

One is that the risk of CTE rises with more years of play. A child who starts tackle football in elementary school and plays through college faces far more risk of cognitive decline, researchers say, than someone who starts in high school.  

The second is that a child’s brain is still growing and more vulnerable to injury. 

“What occurred was that parents looked at the risk to their children, and they recognized that there was a risk to the developing brain, and that was something that they had to take seriously,” said Gregory O’Shanick, medical director of the Center for Neurorehabilitation Services in Richmond, Va., and board member of the Brain Injury Association of America. 

“When you look at the No. 1 cause of concussions, in terms of sports, it is, in fact, football,” he said. 

A Centers for Disease Control and Prevention page advises, “We all play a role in protecting youth from concussion.” The federal agency cites a study that found children who play tackle football sustain 15 times more “head impacts” than athletes in flag football, a tackle-free variant. 

A competing page, uploaded by the NFL, offers talking points for coaches looking to rebuild flagging programs. “You might get some questions — here’s how you can answer them,” the site says, listing safety enhancements and urging coaches, with just a hint of defiance, to “help parents see for themselves.” 

In the 6-12 demographic, tackle football trails several other team sports in participation, including baseball, basketball, soccer, tennis, golf and volleyball.  

But football remains America’s national sport, in terms of popularity and television viewers. And it retains its dominance in high schools, even after the modest decline of the past decade.  

Given the sport’s public relations issues, researchers have grown curious about the sensibilities of the million-plus families that still support the sport. 

Warner and her Ohio State colleagues surveyed nearly 4,000 Americans and found them almost evenly divided on whether tackle football is appropriate for children.  

Football supporters tend to be male, conservative, racially diverse, patriotic and a bit less educated than those who think the sport ill-suited to the young.  

“It’s not just your gender, just your race or just your class, or whether you played football, but a lot of those things in combination with each other,” she said. “Football has been thought of as this sport that turns boys into men.”  

A survey of high school athletes by researchers at Grand View University in Iowa found that students who quit football worried more about earning money and managing time than avoiding concussions.  

“The kids who have chosen to play have taken on that risk and understand there are potential harms, but they’re willing to play anyway,” said Scott Bull, an associate professor of sport management at Grand View.  

Indiana University researchers surveyed public attitudes toward juvenile football and found well-reasoned arguments on both sides. 

The Indiana survey asked respondents if they would let a teenage boy play tackle football. Those who said yes tended to know a lot about the game and its safety protocols, said Kyle Kercher, an assistant professor of sport management in the university’s School of Public Health.  

Those who said no tended to be well-versed on the potential for brain injury and to think the sport is implicitly unsafe. 

Like his colleagues in Ohio and Iowa, Kercher is a football fan. He played in high school and college. He sustained two concussions. He awoke from one at a stadium in Oregon, thinking he was in Montana. 

To help the sport, Kercher has conducted groundbreaking research on how coaches can conduct meaningful practices without injuring brains.  

Kercher’s findings sound obvious. Players are much less likely to butt heads when they run drills without physical contact, and when they collide with a bag rather than a body. Coaches can run “control” drills, which halt at the moment of contact, and “thud” drills, which stop in mid-tackle.  

“It wasn’t that long ago that I was in high school, and there were no limits on how much we hit each other,” he said. Today, coaches are learning to limit tackles outside of games. At game time, players are instructed not to “lead with their head,” Kercher said.  

When Kercher was a graduate student, a colleague told him, “Nobody should be allowed to play football,” thinking he would agree. He did not. 

“My whole approach to this is, I feel it is so deeply, culturally ingrained in American society, I don’t see it going away,” he said. “And so, I want to make it as safe as possible.”