213
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 17 Oct 2023
213 points (96.1% liked)
Politics
5854 readers
59 users here now
Discuss world politics here.
Rules
-
Be civil and respectful
-
No NSFW content
-
No blatantly fake news or unfounded conspiracy theories
-
No heavily sensationalized articles
Community icon by Webalys, licensed under CC BY 3.0.
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
Dems need to nominate Liz Cheney for speaker. They could easily get 20 GOP votes (she was their former leader) but would only need 5 of their votes. She would still be Republican but she is also a loyal American.
The reasonable Republicans have always had the option of approaching the Democrats and making concessions in order to get a speaker elected on a bipartisan basis, they just haven't.
We are talking about a speaker elected by all Dems and a small number of Republicans. It would have to be Dems to set that up.
Didn't she not get elected?
Weirdly enough, being a member of the House is not a requirement to be Speaker.
That’s true.
You don't have to be a congressman to be the House Speaker. Putting her up as Speaker would be a big fuck you to the people who didn't reelect her.
I approve.
Won't work this go around. The speaker pro tempore wouldn't let the vote get to the floor if they thought that might happen. It's an all republican circus this time.
He literally has to schedule floor votes. It is his only job and the constitution requires that there must be a speaker. His only power is to decide when the next vote is scheduled. He cannot control how anyone votes.
Yes but he will not be scheduling a vote if he thinks that has any chance of happening. And you aren't coordinating 217 people without him noticing. The constitution doesn't say how often they have to vote and there aren't exactly precedents requiring him to schedule a vote if he doesn't want to.
This assumption that one person could force the House to never have a speaker is a ridiculously nonsensical argument. It is literally an impossibility for there never to be a vote for speaker. There is a 0% chance of that happening. The constitution requires it. If there is too long of a delay than the members can and obviously would hold a vote without him. And the GOP would pay a huge price in the next election for attempting to bring the idiocy to a new level.
Is it really that ridiculous? One man forced the Senate to never vote on a Supreme Court Justice, and they have the constitutional obligation to do that.
The GOP also paid no price for that.
Yes, it is really that ridiculous.
Nope. That one man was backed by the majority of members.
If you think the majority of the GOP want a functioning government, then I got some bad news for you.
You're right, it's an impossibility for there never to be a vote for speaker. But the GOP is in the driver seat. They'll either come to a consensus or there will not be a speaker until the next congress, which is in 14 months. They'll probably come to a consensus because, you're right, the electoral consequences are probably too great if they don't. But there is virtually no chance that democrats and a handful of Republicans are going to get to decide the speaker this term.
That is not a possibility. That is a completely impossible scenario for a large variety of reasons.
There is a very significant chance. Cross party coalitions are a very common thing in state legislatures. And even Republicans are getting totally fed up with the anti-American neofascists in their party.
In the case where they don't elect a new speaker for a significant amount of time, they'll grant the speaker pro tempore additional powers in the meantime.
There might be a cross-party coalition, but it will not be a minority of Republicans. And if it does happen, it's not going to happen soon. Looking like you're working with democrats is poison to the republican base.
Only for huge concessions and a formal power sharing arrangement.
This is starting to look like the most probable scenario. A majority of congress can vote to change the rules at any time. They could give the head janitor the power to call speaker votes if they wanted to. I don't know who the next speaker will be, but I already know that Liz Cheney has a more probable chance than Gym Jordan.
Not in Biden districts. Looking like you're working with the neofascist wing of the GOP is poison in the Biden districts.
Like avoiding a government shut down and aid to Ukraine? It's not like they're getting much better deals even if they help elect Cheney as speaker.
Why would they want to, though? They'll let the Republicans swing in the wind, especially if they can get major priorities done through limited powers granted to McHenry on a temporary basis. That gives them more control, and like we've both acknowledged--this can be an electoral disaster for Republicans.
I said the base. Even in Biden districts, they can't piss off the base too much unless they don't feel like being the republican nominee.
Like bringing to a floor vote everything Dems want to have a vote on.
They're already sending letters saying to give it too McHenry in 15-day increments to get a budget/another round of CR's and aid to Ukraine handled. I don't think it'll be everything the dems want but it also won't be McHenry can bring anything he wants to the floor.