Absolutely Jordan will demand a vote. He’ll dare those increasingly few holdouts to publicly oppose him and face the wrath of the right-wing machine. And if he doesn’t get 217 on the first vote, he’ll make them vote again and again and again until they break.
To quote an anonymous legislator (they’re always anonymous) I read in one article: “Moderates always cave — a tale as old as time.”
So it’s probably not too early for me to start weeping?
Republican moderates are acting like domestic abuse victims. “He promised me he will do better!” “This time will be different!”
What’s that Susan Collins quote?
“Shocked!, okay, not that shocked.”
or
“Two weeks.”
or
“Deeply concerned.”
Yes, that’s it. “But they have assured me…”
Well I guess that we can count on a government shut down in November probably lasting at least through the end of the year. Jordan isn’t going to make the same mistake that McCarthy did and support any budget or continuing resolution that would be acceptable to any Democrats. That will be the litmis test. If in negotiations reach the point where the current proposal on the table is able to pass the Senate and get signed by Biden then that means they are compromising too much and they need to move it another ten paces to the right.
So really the question is, how much damage does Speaker Jordan do to the GOP chances of holding the house in 2024? I’d like to think it will be significant… but I’ve been disappointed before.
I am not encouraged by the election math in 2024. I don’t see how the Senate isn’t lost and I have low hopes for the House.
WAPO notes Jim Jordan’s thin legislative record: “He has yet to get a bill signed into law since being elected in 2006.”
For the do-nothing Freedom Caucus, that’s a qualification. There’s an outfit called, the Center for Effective Lawmaking, who ranks House members based upon the substantial legislation they’ve gotten into law. Jordan ranks 4th from the bottom, among Republicans. Think about that. This is the guy they want to cut deals.
Generally speaking, the Freedom Caucus doesn’t do too well on this list (I say because they care about messaging, not policy). The top-ranked FC member is Matt Rosendale: he’s 22nd from the top. But he’s not speaker material since he was only elected to the House in 2020. Next on the list is Mike Johnson, 27th from the top, elected in 2016. Over at his wiki page I learned that, “On October 13, 2023, Johnson stated that he would not run for Speaker and instead endorsed colleague Jim Jordan,[34] however, on the same day NBC News reported that Johnson was considering running for Speaker if Jordan dropped out, as previous nominee Steve Scalise did.”
Incredible. Minority or Majority leaders of the House or Senate need to master internal politics far more than they do external politics. Mitch McConnell has less charisma than a doorknob, but he’s effective in building internal-party consensus. For the average GOP House member, voting for Jim Jordan seems like an exercise in masochism. They don’t even need to negotiate with the Dems: they could just wait until the Freedom Caucus settles for one of their members who is less of a weirdo. Like Mike Johnson. Mike Johnson (Louisiana politician) - Wikipedia
What Jordan has been pitching is a six month continuing resolution that would find the government through April. Under the debt ceiling deal reached earlier this year, if Congress hasn’t adoopted final appropriations bills by then, the government takes an across-the-board 1% cut. He wants to use that as leverage to negotiate with the Senate and Administration.
Can’t say wether that’s still his plan and if he’ll get the R’s to go along with it.
What will he use as leverage with his FC comrades? He’s giving away a continuing resolution in exchange for something they already have, and that sounds an awful lot like “Working with the Democrats” to me. Plus, it hands Biden a political win. “Biden’s plan on the Debt Ceiling has convinced Republicans to support funding the government until next year!”
The FC’s whole plan is to screw shit up to make Biden and the Democrats look bad. How does this plan advance that cause? Is a 1% cut across the board going to do that? Hardly.
Well then he’s PERFECT! Republicans don’t want to govern, or actually get anything done other than performative theatre and grifting the rubes.
Their whole platform is “Let’s fuck up the government!”
Well, I guess they are not into the whole “cutting taxes” thing any more, a la “Starve the Beast” to curb government (social programs) spending, so they are going to take the more direct strategy now and just go ahead and shut down the government altogether.
As a side note, what was the last tax that got cut, and was it the Republicans who cut it?
The last major U.S. tax cut, as far as I know, was the “Tax Cuts and Jobs Act” from 2017, which primarily benefited the wealthy and corporations – also, note that the tax cuts for individuals were temporary, while the tax cuts for corporations were permanent. It was passed when both houses of Congress were controlled by the GOP, and, of course, with Trump in the White House.
This is one reason I suspect that the Republicans might want to lose in 2024 and have everything that resets after 2025 on the hands of the Democrats, because it’s extremely unlikely (in my mind at least) that they’ll be interested in making those idiotic tax cuts permanent, but the Republicans will of course use it as a platform to decry how the Democrats just raised taxes.
The Bulwark points me to Semafor:
Wiley is backing a plan that would temporarily expand McHenry’s authority in the House for 15-day increments, and direct him to only bring legislation to the floor that would avoid a government shutdown in November, provide aid to Israel and Ukraine, and deal with the remaining 2024 appropriations bills. Wiley, along with three other Democratic members of the Problem Solvers Caucus, penned a letter to McHenry last week requesting a meeting to discuss the possibility.
OMG, the Problem Preeners caucus actually did something useful. Incredible. The Blue Dogs (all 10 members) also support this. Big Kev McCarthy appears to be on board. Rep. Chuck Fleischmann, R-Tenn is concerned about court challenges to any actions taken with a sort-of Speaker of the House. Good point. Where did this disturbing outbreak of sanity come from?
Don’t hold your breath. I think the vote for Jiz Jordan may happen today. Let’s see how that goes before getting hopes up for something that tastes great and is less filling (sane and yet effective). Let’s see if those same Rs on the Problem Solvers vote to make the problem better or worse.
I can’t see how this will stand. He either has only the limited authority everyone always presumed he had, or he is effectively the Speaker until replaced, and has all the authority that the Speaker typically has. On what legal basis can they assert that he has “just this bit of extra authority”, for these specific items?
Might as well put him on the Jedi Council, but deny him the title of Master. Worked out so well the last time!
By passing a rule that allows him to.
But the point is, they can’t adopt new rules without a proper Speaker in place. So how do they change these rules?
This is a problem they can fix after they have a new Speaker in place, but until then, they’re stuck.
If a majority of the House decides they have the authority to pass an amendment to the rules while under a Speaker pro tem, then they have that authority.