IOW
Hand us R the speakership today and we’ll consider not being totally dysfunctional destroyers of the USA and its credit rating for a whole week. Then after that we’ll forget you (D’s) ever existed.
Explain to us again what makes you think this would be a good idea for anyone of any party to agree to?
I mean it’s an unprecedented opportunity to get to influence the majority caucus as the minority caucus.
I’d also do it for a relatively small victory from a policy perspective - clean funding including Ukraine being the main thing.
This has been answered. There will be a govt shutdown if we dont.
This argument’s been done to death. But as a technical matter, it’s up to Speaker Pro Tem Patrick McHenry to decide when the House will vote on a Speaker. He’s a loyal party man, and there’s no way he would let the House vote for a Speaker if he thought the result would be a Democrat-Republican “moderates” coalition.
This is how Fox is characterizing the current feel on Jordan. I’d say it’s not good news…
And negotiating with terrorists always ends so well.
Here’s an analysis of the situation by WaPo.
(gift link)
Not that that system is perfect either - AIUI, Israel’s parliament has been essentially deadlocked for years because no party can win an outright majority.
That’s because of their pure proportional representation system, which greatly magnifies the political power of small, single issue parties.
PR also played a role in the fall of the Weimar Republic. The German constituent assembly learned from that problem in the Basic Law after WWII, reducing the scope for PR and making confidence motions more difficult, creating greater stability, but within a parliamentary system.
I think you’re underestimating the power of money. Regardless of political bent, the name of the game is how to maximize the money.
A deadlocked parliament (congress, whatever) is what you want to maximize donations. Both (all) parties are going to change their platforms to try to make as even a divide as possible, because both (all) sides recognize that that is what maximizes income.
Israel’s parliament, US HOR, it doesn’t matter. If one side starts getting more support from the citizens, it’s time to redefine the platform. Maximizing income doesn’t occur if everyone agrees that brutal murder is bad. It’s the murder of the wrong people that is bad. Otherwise, well, comme ci comme ça.
What is the point of the nominating committee vote if anyone can vote for anyone in the regular vote? I can understand having a private meeting to settle on someone but if enough of them don’t agree, why go to a regular vote?
Yes, thank you. Just came by to post the very same thing.
What happened in January was because electing a Speaker was the first order of business of the initial organization session of the House-Elect. Until that was done nobody could even swear in as members (which I find to be a daft procedural order, but hey, what do I know), never mind carry out any official function including adopting the Rules or naming the committees.
Today that does not have to happen because the members are duly sworn, properly voted and approved Rules are in place, and there is a Speaker Pro Tem to maintain a constituted House-in-being until there is a full-time Speaker.
The Republican Conference i.e. the gathering of Republican members, has AFAICT always provided for allowing secret ballots for the internal decisions. So the Conference would choose who would be the party-official speaker candidate by majority --if not undisputed acclamation-- and anyone worthy to be Speaker-in-Waiting would have a good idea of who was not all in on him so his team would whip those votes.
The second vote to commit to support the presumptive candidate on the Floor, back in Ye Olde Days when Normal People were the Norm, would politically bind any reluctant members to at the very least not prevent the organizing of a majority. At the start of a new Congress, all that would have happened before the first seating on the afternoon of 3 January and they’d show up having that vote already squared away.
However… this Republican Conference is full of people who have realized there is no penalty consequence for Playing Stupid Games. That’s what has caused the waste of this week. And McHenry is not going to start the voting and risk a repeat of last January until his colleagues assure him they got their act together.
Could a majority really not force a speaker vote?
I honestly don’t know. The House isn’t operating anything like it normally should right now. McHenry has just been gaveling in then immediately recessing the body subject to the call of the chair. They haven’t taken a vote on the floor in nearly two weeks.
Also, interestingly, the House webpage still lists Kevin McCarthy as Speaker of the House.
I assume that the people responsible for updating the website have been sacked and that the people responsible for sacking the people who have just been sacked have themselves been sacked.
Apparently there is still a plate over his office deeming him Speaker of the House Kevin McCarthy that is drawing tourists to take selfies in front of.
Maybe the plaque department knows something we don’t. Could we be seeing the Once-and-Future King Speaker of the House?
Republicans reinvent ranked choice voting:
Rep. Nathan Moran actually proposed that every member in the room write down on a piece of paper their top 10 candidates for speaker and that the conference chair add it all up and report the results out to the conference.
Also, it’s hard to compare them to toddlers when the Dems can’t act like the grownups. And who knows, maybe a few swing voters will see that and come over.
I’m pretty sure the ship has already sailed on that point. At this point, we’re all debating if half your voters can get their heads out of their asses.