The Speaker is elected by members-elect; the constitution says nothing about parties. If the majority party is splintered, couldn’t the minority party easily have enough votes, more than either faction of the majority, to elect their own candidate?
A bipartisan solution is being discussed. Apparently the minority members get to vote.
The person with the majority of votes cast wins; party doesn’t matter. The minority party (by definition) doesn’t have enough votes to win, unless some portion of the majority party votes for the minority party’s candidate. If Majority Candidate A gets 25% of the total votes, Majority Party Candidate B gets 26% of the total votes, and Minority Party Candidate C gets 49% of the votes (all the minority party votes, but no more), then nobody wins because nobody has the majority (in fact something similar to that already happened)
OK so the winner must get a majority of votes cast, not a plurality. That answers the question. Which also explains why a handful of R’s can block McCarthy, since the GOP majority margin is not huge.
Exactly. The Republicans have the same margin as the Democrats had last session, but it’s not working out quite as well this time
A majority of votes cast other than as “present”.
Assuming no vote to change the rules to allow plurality wins.
Right. For the purposes of this election “present” is the same as absent. I think there have been cases where the House has used a plurality rule, but they’d need a plurality for the rule change - and that’s unlikely.
I think majority for the rule change. And then I think needs confirmation by a majority after selection. But not seen source for that bit.
There must be 218 votes from the Members-elect to select the Speaker. That is one more than half of the total count of the House (435).
If the House wants to change the threshold, it can only comes from a House rules change.
- But that requires actual Members to vote on the rules change.
- But that requires those voting to be Members.
- But that requires the oath of office to be administered in order to be Members.
- But that requires a Speaker to be selected by the Members-elect so that the Speaker can administer the oath to the Members-elect to become Members.
Apparently, there were two previous times in history when nobody could get a majority of the votes for Speaker, and after a large number of failed ballots, eventually the House voted to change the rules to make a plurality sufficient. So it’s possible, at least theoretically. Whether it’s possible politically, in the current situation, is not a question for FQ.
No, it’s a majority of votes cast.
In both cases, they merely held a plurality vote and apparently agreed that they would then vote for whoever got the plurality vote in the next ballot so that they’d get the majority required.
Boehner was elected with 216 votes in 2015.
Pelosi was elected with 216 votes in 2021.
I think the president pro tem of the house (Democrat) is not casting her ballot so only 434 votes, which is why Jeffries is getting 213, still 218 needed to win. They mentioned on the news one R voted present, so only 433 votes and so 217 needed to win.
The GOP are not going to change the rules to plurality, because unless they get everyone on board (or, all but 8?) they would lose to Jeffries(D). I think the Dems are just having too much fun watching the clown parade implode to bother fixing it yet… If 40 of the Dems vote present, then McCarthy could win with 201 thus royally annoying the 20. .
The reason that only 434 votes are being cast is that there is a vacant House seat right now; Donald McEachin, a Democrat from Virginia, died from cancer in November, after having won re-election to his seat earlier that month.
Jeffries is getting all 212 (not 213) Democratic votes on each ballot.
That’s a reason but another is that McCarthy isn’t sufficiently centrist for anyone but R’s to vote for him.
There is no president pro tem of the House.
It has happened in the past that they agreed to allow a plurality to elect the speaker. I guess if they voted for such a rule, the dissidents would be forced to accept McCarthy since, from their point of view, a Democrat would be even worse. Any further speculation on the situation doesn’t belong here.
At least one has said he’d rather see Jeffries as Speaker than McCarthy.
So if the winner needs half of votes cast, who are the Democrats voting for? If they abstained then McCarthy would have been elected.