How to cut federal spending – and by how much – consumes Congressional Republicans right now.

Firestorms are scorching Southern California. But a political firestorm is about to singe Capitol Hill.

The natural disaster dynamic has morphed into a regular fiscal nightmare in Congress. And frankly, the way lawmakers address natural disasters creates a hyper obstacle to making a serious dent in the deficit and national debt.

Expect staggering costs.

TRUMP GIVES BLUE STATE REPUBLICANS MARCHING ORDER ON CRITICAL TAX NEGOTIATION

"This is going to be a very expensive event," forecast Rep. George Whitesides, D-Calif. 

FEMA is bracing for the price tag.

"We know this is going to be billions," said FEMA Administrator Deanne Criswell.

President Biden is vowing help. 

"We’re going to pay for it. And we've got to be prepared to pay for it," said the president. "We're going to need the United States Congress to follow up with appropriations to help provide significant help for our fellow Americans who need this help." 

Catastrophic natural disasters now pummel different quarters of the U.S. at an alarming rate. Devastating wildfires swept across Maui in 2023. Tornado outbreaks are the norm. Blackouts from the heat – or blizzards coupled with bone-chilling cold – dim the power grid. The dual hurricanes of Milton and Helene spun through the south last year, chewing through property just days apart in the fall. Water spilled out of rivers, creeks, steams, brooks and culverts, submerging entire communities.

Congress coughed up $100 billion just before Christmas to help victims recover from the hurricanes. Some of that money went to help people restart their businesses or cover costs to rebuild. $27 billion of it went to reload FEMA’s Disaster Relief Fund (DRF) to prepare for future emergencies – like the one now incinerating the Golden State. Milton and Helene drained the DRF.

But Republicans now run Congress. President-elect Trump soon occupies the Oval Office. And when it comes to California – and what may have sparked the fires, Republicans could be reluctant to assist. That’s especially true as the mantra from Republicans is to slash $2 trillion in spending. In fact, there’s a fear among some Democrats that Congressional Republicans and President-elect Trump may try to penalize California – because it leans to the left.

Republicans now run the House and Senate. Mr. Trump takes office next week.

"When it comes to Congressional funding, the idea that we're going to have an open checkbook, no matter how bad your policies are, is crazy," said Rep. Warren Davidson, R-Ohio, on FOX Business.

TRUMP REPORTEDLY PLANS TO UNLEASH AROUND 100 EXECUTIVE ORDERS AFTER TAKING OFFICE

Democrats warned against partisan and region discord when natural disasters strike. 

"California has voted to support supplemental packages for hurricanes in the American South. And now this is our time of need," said Whitesides.

Several Northern California Republicans told Fox that Democrats from Southern California were exceptionally helpful muscling through aid for their part of the state after wildfires.

So what happens when the bill comes due for the Los Angeles wildfires?

"We help all Americans," said Rep. Bennie Thompson, D-Miss., the top Democrat on the House Homeland Security Committee which oversees FEMA.

Thompson was confident Congress would meet the needs of California.

"If we need to do more, we will," said Thompson. 

Some Republicans blamed the wildfires - and the response - on liberal Democrats who run much of California. 

"It is an epic disaster of mismanagement," said Rep. Byron Donalds, R-Fla., on FOX Business. 

"What's happened in California is the fault of (California Gov.) Gavin Newsom (D) and the legislature there."

"What we can see is the failure of policy there and the failure of leadership in California," piled on Sen. Bill Hagerty, R-Tenn., on Fox. "We’re going to have to have real accountability. We need to have hearings to understand… to get to the bottom of what's taking place. What the failures have been."

California insurers nixed hundreds of thousands of policies for homeowners in areas prone to wildfires after state regulators banned higher premiums – despite the hazards. Some Republicans seized on this issue.

"California made some really bad policy decisions that caused those insurance companies to flee," said House Majority Leader Steve Scalise, R-La. "The people that made those policy decisions have to be held accountable, too."

Even some Democrats questioned the local response. 

Rep. Jimmy Gomez, D-Calif., worked on a bill to help guarantee water for all Californians when they turn on the spigot when he served in the state legislature.

NEWSOM FACT-CHECK SITE ON FIRE RESPONSE LINKS TO DEM PARTY FUNDRAISING GIANT

"Why didn't they have water? Is it negligence or is it just the fact that so many fires were breaking out all over the city in so many different areas that the system was being pushed to capacity and got overwhelmed?" asked Gomez. 

Other Democrats rebuked GOP criticism of California’s leaders.

"I think that's all just ridiculous," said Rep. Robert Garcia, D-Calif. "I think the governor is on the ground doing a great job managing the response. I don't think that we should be putting blame on anyone." 

The cost of the fires likely means demands for another infusion of cash from Congress for FEMA – just as Republicans are starting to look to cut billions if not more than a trillion dollars. How can lawmakers pay for natural disasters – and yet slash all of this money? 

"It's always going to be hard. I think we just got to prioritize. And, I think we need to couple any major spending with cuts on the other side," said Rep. Tim Burchett, R-Tenn.

"So to be clear, when that bill comes due for California, some conservatives want to see some offsets?" asked yours truly of Burchett.

"Absolutely," replied Burchett.

The wildfires would have been a major issue had Congress not forked over more than $100 billion just to FEMA and various disasters in the bill before Christmas. Yet some Republicans are skeptical of the competence of FEMA to do the job. 

"I doubt the people of California will get their $700 that will be promised to them. Because as it happened in North Carolina, in Tennessee, a lot of people were turned down because all their identification was burnt up or was washed away. And there it'll be all burnt up. It'll just be a cluster," predicted Burchett.

Florida’s former statewide emergency management director posed an ominous warning.

"I’ve got bad news for everybody. Disasters are coming everywhere," observed Rep. Jared Moskowitz, D-Fla., on MSNBC.

More disasters means additional demand for relief. That’s the challenge as Republicans try to cut spending. 

A few wise souls on Capitol Hill have tinkered with developing a new model to address natural disasters. The current budget model is fund appropriations under the premise that NOTHING will happen. Then it’s sometimes a challenge for lawmakers to pass a bill providing additional aid. 

So there were two monster hurricanes in the fall. Wildfires now. What’s next? An earthquake? Blizzards? Ice storms? Tornadoes? Drought? Floods? 

There has been debate about creating a "rainy day fund" - perhaps a "monsoon day fund" - that Congress can tap to dispatch major chunks of money without hassle when natural disasters hit.

Other natural disasters are inevitable. 

But Congressional funding to cover the cost is far from it.

The Constitution dictates that the 119th Congress begins at noon et on Friday. 

And the first order of business in the House is to elect the Constitutional officer for the legislative branch of government: Speaker of the House.

Only the House votes for Speaker. And the House can’t do anything – I’ll repeat that, anything – until it chooses a Speaker. 

It can’t swear-in Members until the House taps a Speaker and he or she is sworn-in. The Speaker then swears-in the rest of the body, en masse. Then the House must adopt a rules package to govern daily operations. Only then can the House go about debating bills, voting and constructing committees for hearings. 

HEALTHY LIVING, PARTY UNITY, 'SMELLING THE ROSES': CAPITOL HILL'S NEW YEAR'S RESOLUTIONS

If the House fails to elect a Speaker on the first ballot, it must proceed to a second ballot. 

And on and on.  

Consider for a moment that the House had never even taken a second vote for Speaker in a century before the donnybrook two years ago. It took four ballots to re-elect late House Speaker Frederick Gillett, R-Mass., in 1923. 

What is past is prologue for the House. Consider how the House consumed 15 rounds spread out over five days before electing former House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., in January, 2023. The Speakership remained vacant – and thus, the House frozen – for 22 days after Republicans dumped McCarthy nine months later. House Republicans then tapped House Majority Leader Steve Scalise, R-La., for Speaker. Scalise withdrew his name before there was even a floor vote. House GOPers then tapped Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, to become Speaker. But Jordan lost three consecutive votes for Speaker on the House floor, bleeding support on each ballot. House Republicans then anointed House Majority Whip Tom Emmer, R-Minn., for Speaker. Emmer withdrew hours later. 

House Republicans finally nominated House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., for the job. The Louisiana Republican won on the floor. But some conservatives have been disappointed in Johnson ever since. They’ve flagged how he handled multiple, interim spending bills from last November on. They didn’t like that he allowed a bill on the floor to aid Ukraine. They opposed him doing yet another interim spending bill in September. They really didn’t like how he worked with Democrats on major, must-do pieces of legislation. And then there was the misstep of the staggering, 1,500-page interim spending package which Mr. Trump and Elon Musk pulverized from afar in December. Johnson then did President-elect Trump’s bidding with another spending package – which included a debt ceiling increase. But 38 House Republicans bolted on that bill. 

So Johnson’s tenure has been bumpy. And that’s why he’s on the hook come Friday afternoon during the vote for Speaker. Everyone on Capitol Hill is on tenterhooks when it comes to wrapping this up expeditiously. 

Here’s what will happen Friday at noon: 

REPUBLICAN CONGRESSMAN CALLS ON INCOMING ADMINISTRATION TO TARGET 'THE AXIS OF AGGRESSORS'

Acting House Clerk Kevin McCumber will preside until the House elects a Speaker. The first order of business is a "call of the House." That’s where the House establishes how many of its Members-elect are there, simply voting "present." The House should clock in at 434 members: 219 Republicans and 215 Democrats. There should be one vacancy. Former Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., resigned in the fall – and said he did not "intend" to serve in the new Congress, despite having won reelection. 

Watch to see if there are absences in that call of the House. Fox is told that Democrats who have struggled with health issues of late – including Reps. Raul Grijalva, D-Ariz., Dwight Evans, D-Penn., and former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., will likely be there. But the Speaker’s election is about the math. How many lawmakers report to the House chamber will dictate margins in the Speaker’s vote.

Then it’s on to nominating speeches. Incoming House Republican Conference Chairwoman Lisa McClain, R-Mich., will nominate Johnson for Speaker. House Democratic Caucus Chairman Pete Aguilar, D-Calif., will nominate House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y. Anyone else can then place someone’s name in nomination.

Then, the House calls the roll of Members-elect alphabetically. Each Member rises and verbally responds, calling out their choice by name. Reps. Alma Adams, D-N.C., Robert Aderholt, R-Ala., and the aforementioned Aguilar are the first names out of the block.

But lawmakers can vote for anyone they want. That includes persons who aren’t House Members. That’s why there have been votes cast over the years for the late Gen. Colin Powell, Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., former Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., and former U.S. Comptroller General David Walker. 

This is what Johnson – or anyone else must do – to win the Speakership:

The winning candidate must secure an outright majority of all Members voting for a candidate by name. 

So let’s say there are 434 members and all vote for someone by name. The magic number is 218. If Johnson gets the votes of all 219 Republicans, he wins. If Johnson gets 218 votes, he also wins. But 217? No dice. Under those circumstances Johnson would have prospectively outpolled Jeffries, 217-215 – with two votes going to other candidates. But the "most votes" doesn’t win. 217 is not an outright majority of House Members voting for someone by name. The House must take ANOTHER ballot to elect a Speaker. 

Fox is told there are anywhere from 12 to 17 Republicans who could vote for someone besides Johnson. And some Republicans are being cagey about their votes. 

BERNIE SANDERS PLANS TO SPEARHEAD LEGISLATION ON KEY TRUMP PROPOSAL

Here’s something to watch: Members who vote "present."

Rather than voting for someone besides Johnson, some Republicans may protest by simply voting "present." A "present" vote does not count against Johnson. 

So let’s do some hypothetical math here:

Let’s say 434 Members cast ballots. Jeffries secures support from all 215 Democrats. Three Republicans vote "present." In other words, not voting for any candidate by name. Johnson scores 216 votes. He has the most votes. But more importantly, only 431 Members voted for someone by name. 216 is an outright majority of 431. 434 doesn’t matter under these circumstances. So Johnson becomes Speaker. 

But there is serious danger in too many Republicans voting "present." 

Consider this scenario: 

All 215 Democrats vote for Jeffries. But five Republicans vote "present." Johnson records 214 votes. 429 Members cast ballots for someone by name. The magic number here is 215. Guess who’s Speaker? Jeffries. He marshalled an outright majority of all Members voting for a candidate by name.

As they say in the movies, "You play a very dangerous game, Mr. Bond."

With such a thin margin in the House, Republicans are absolutely tinkering with fire if they get too cute by half. Yes. Some conservatives might not want to re-elect Johnson as Speaker. But they certainly don’t want Jeffries. 

So it’s hard to say what happens on Friday afternoon. If the House dithers too long, this could delay the certification of the Electoral College vote on Monday. The House and Senate must meet in a Joint Session of Congress on January 6 to certify the election results. No House Speaker? No Joint Session. 

But something else will likely unfold if this drags on. Johnson loyalists and mainstream Republicans have had it with right-wing ideologues, the Freedom Caucus and other freelancers. Expect a full-on brawl between those two factions if Republicans struggle to elect a Speaker.

And as we wrote earlier, what is past is prologue. 

A protracted battle over the Speakership serves as prologue to the looming, internecine fights among Republicans when it comes to governing. That’s to say nothing of implementing a solitary plank of President-elect Trump’s agenda.