When the House votes on Wednesday to authorize an impeachment inquiry into President Biden, it will be the culmination of a slow but decisive political shift among Republicans — urged on by former President Donald J. Trump and his closest allies in Congress — from a place of resisting such an inquiry to fully embracing it.
The vote is both a consequential step and a mere formality; Republicans have been conducting an impeachment investigation for months, a fact that former Speaker Kevin McCarthy made official when he announced in September that the inquiry was commencing without a House vote.
But this week’s action follows a monthslong effort by G.O.P. leaders to shore up support among more than a dozen mainstream conservatives who had been skeptical about pushing forward on impeachment amid an investigation that has so far failed to produce concrete evidence that the president has committed high crimes or misdemeanors.
They succeeded in part because of fresh, explosive allegations against the president’s son Hunter Biden and by making the case to their G.O.P. colleagues that there is no harm in scrutinizing whether the president might have played a role.
“I can defend an inquiry right now,” said Representative Don Bacon, Republican of Nebraska, who represents a district won by Mr. Biden in 2020 and says he remains opposed to voting to impeach him. “Let’s see what they find out.”
With a tight margin in the House, Republicans can only afford to lose a handful of votes when they take the inquiry vote to the floor, and they face a challenge from some members who are arguably among the most familiar with the facts of the case.
One ultraconservative member, Representative Ken Buck of Colorado, has written an opinion essay denouncing the inquiry as relying on an “imagined narrative.” Still others say they remain opposed to impeaching Mr. Biden given the lack of conclusive evidence, but feel no compunction about voting to continue an investigation that is already underway.
That is in large part because of the quiet cajoling of the Republicans leading the impeachment investigation, including some of Mr. Trump’s closest allies in Congress: Representatives James R. Comer, the chairman of the Oversight Committee; Jim Jordan, the chairman of the Judiciary Committee; and Jason Smith, the chairman of the Ways and Means Committee.
They have made presentations at a series of internal meetings in which they portrayed Mr. Biden as corrupt and attempted to implicate him in the conduct of Hunter Biden, who is under felony indictment accused of tax crimes.
House Republicans, led by Representative Elise Stefanik of New York, have rolled out a marketing campaign aimed at casting the Bidens as a “crime family,” featuring a new website and posters with grainy photos of the Bidens through a night vision-style view.
To alleviate the concerns of more mainstream Republicans who could face tough re-election fights, House leaders have also emphasized that the vote is not for impeachment charges, but merely to continue an inquiry into whether they are warranted.
“When I listened to the briefings which I’ve received in conference from Chairman Smith, Chairman Comer and Chairman Jordon, it’s alarming,” said Representative Tom Cole, Republican of Oklahoma, the chairman of the Rules Committee who is known as an institutionalist. “We know a lot more than we knew a few months ago because of the activities of these committees.”
Interviews with House Republicans previously skeptical of authorizing an impeachment inquiry pointed to several examples of a shift in the dynamics on Capitol Hill.
First, because of Mr. McCarthy’s unilateral announcement in September — made as he was facing intense pressure from the far right, including for the lack of progress on impeachment — this week’s vote merely affirms the status quo.
Second, House Republicans continue to use news releases and television appearances on conservative networks to spread the message that Mr. Biden is corrupt, even in the absence of evidence. That has encouraged Republican primary voters to pressure their representatives to get on board with an investigation.
Mr. Comer said those voters had leaned on the “15 to 20 moderates” who previously had concerns about voting to move forward with an investigation.
“A great thing happened during Thanksgiving,” Mr. Comer said on Fox News. “The members went home — many of them for the first time and circulated for the first time in over 10 weeks — and they met people in Walmart and people on Main Street, and they’re like, ‘What in the world have the Bidens done to receive millions and millions of dollars from our enemies around the world?’”
Third, the White House essentially dared Republicans to call the vote, by dismissing their investigation as illegitimate without the imprimatur of the full House. Richard Sauber, a special counsel to Mr. Biden, condemned the inquiry in a Nov. 17 letter and resisted making certain Biden administration employees available for closed-door interviews.
“You also claim the mantle of an ‘impeachment inquiry’ knowing full well that the Constitution requires that the full House authorize an impeachment inquiry before a committee may utilize compulsory process pursuant to the impeachment power — a step the Republican House majority has so far refused to take,” he wrote.
Republican leaders seized on the stance to persuade impeachment skeptics in their ranks that a formal investigation was the only way to overcome White House stonewalling.
“We think impeachments should be rare,” Mr. Bacon said. “I don’t think revenge impeachments are good.” But, he added: “When the president refuses to provide documents like he did last week because you don’t have a formal inquiry, I think that forces our hand.”
Representative Kelly Armstrong, a Republican of North Dakota who also has been skeptical of impeaching Mr. Biden, filed the resolution to formalize the inquiry.
He said the White House had reasonable defenses for each of the Republicans’ accusations, but that the committees had raised enough questions to keep the inquiry going.
“They seem to have an innocent explanation for each individual act,” said Mr. Armstrong, a former public defender. “OK, fine — but it’s pretty hard to have an innocent explanation for all of them when you look at them in totality. And you can prosecute cases that way. A lot of financial crimes, particularly overseas, are conducted under overwhelming circumstantial evidence.”
As the Republicans press forward, many have acknowledged the political nature of the proceedings. Mr. Trump has called on his loyalists in the House to “IMPEACH the BUM, or fade into OBLIVION. THEY DID IT TO US!”
Representative Troy Nehls of Texas told USA Today he wanted to give Mr. Trump, who was twice impeached, “a little bit of ammo to fire back.”
Even some members of House leadership acknowledge there is now a lower standard in American politics for impeachment.
“The Democrats shifted the standard. Frankly, now, impeachment — you could view it almost as a political exercise,” said Representative Guy Reschenthaler of Pennsylvania, the chief deputy whip.
But Democrats argue that Republicans are debasing the process, and that it is inappropriate to compare the thin allegations against Mr. Biden to the alleged crimes of Mr. Trump, who is facing 91 felony counts.
“It’s been proven time and time again that the president of the United States did absolutely nothing wrong,” said Representative Jim McGovern, Democrat of Massachusetts. “This is a very, very sad day for this committee and for this institution and for this country. This impeachment sham is, to put it bluntly, an extreme political stunt.”
Pro-Biden groups are now mobilizing to target Republicans from districts won by Mr. Biden, emphasizing the political risk those lawmakers are taking by moving forward with the inquiry.
The Democratic-aligned Congressional Integrity Project, for instance, launched new mobile billboards this week calling on Representatives John Duarte and David Valadao, both California Republicans, to vote down the inquiry.
