Republicans don’t do that anymore. Indeed, they are quite clear about not compromising or making deals. They are only interested in obstruction of anything democrats do.
The Republicans were pumped because they saw a path out of the political wilderness. They were convinced that even if Obama kept winning policy battles, they could win the broader messaging war simply by remaining unified and fighting him on everything. Their conference chairman, a then-obscure Indiana conservative named Mike Pence, underscored the point with a clip from Patton , showing the general rallying his troops for war against their Nazi enemy: “We’re going to kick the hell out of him all the time! We’re going to go through him like crap through a goose!”
Despite Trump being a toddler and not understanding Washington remember that he got the second highest vote count in history in 2020 and remains the leader of his party.
I’m not saying they work with Democrats. But Republican politicians fully understand the benefit of working with other Republican politicians along with various conservative pundits and wealthy businessmen. The standard deal is “You give me a million dollars for my campaign and I’ll give you a five million dollar tax cut. We both benefit.” That’s Republican politics.
Making Trump the Speaker of the House does nothing to further that goal. They can obstruct just fine by electing a sitting GOP representative to that position.
A sticking point that I don’t think I’ve seen mentioned yet: Not being an elected Representative, Trump wouldn’t get a vote on anything, despite (hypothetically) being named Speaker of the House. Do I have that right? And wouldn’t he insist on such a thing, laws and norms be damned?
Hardly. I would think he doesn’t want a voting record, just to order others, threaten some, praise others, and be the center of attention, as far it doesn’t interfere with his golfing and tanning-bed schedule.
I concur. What good is being one equal vote among 435? Now if it was like ice cream where the speaker got two votes and everyone else just got one, then maybe he’d be interested.
Been reading the news, hearing about McCarthy struggling to herd the wackos in the GOP into unified action, and seeing speculation that this creates an opening not just for Trump but also someone like Liz Cheney, who could be supported by Dems and a small coalition of rebel Republicans. All wildly unlikely, of course, just to be clear.
But — in the bizarre reality where someone gets named as Speaker who is not a sitting member of the House …
Who is that person’s employer? Do they even have one? Do they draw a paycheck? Or is just a ceremonial volunteer role that happens to have a lot of actual authority attached?
The Speaker of the House receives a salary of $223,500 per year, as well as a budget for staff, travel, etc. Their “employer” would be the House itself; their salary and budget being funded through the annual Legislative Appropriations Act.
Right, I saw that, but what I can’t tell is, is that specifically the salary for the Speaker, on top of whatever their Representative salary is, or is that the replacement salary for the Representative who is serving as Speaker?
Just checked and the applicable law (2 USC 4501) creates three categories:
A: Members of both Houses, voting and nonvoting
B: President ProTem of Senate, majority and minority leaders of each House
C: Speaker
So the salary is specifically for being Speaker. People may observe that the statutory title was and remains headed as: “Compensation and Retirement Pay of Members of Congress” ; however it is established law that only the actual Senators and Representatives elected by a state get the vote, but the nonvoting delegates still ARE “members”.
So my utter speculation is a non-Representative Speaker would become a nonvoting Member.
I believe that the shocking (Republican view) results of the mid-terms elections have influenced Republican thinking. I believe that, if it somehow hasn’t already happened, their view of Trump as still being the best choice has been significantly altered. In fact, from what I read this morning, a number of influential Republicans are balking at the thought of Trump even running again.
This guy is severely damaged goods, and he hasn’t even gone to trial yet. It’s only going to get worse. I think the Republican party would be doing itself a service if it began to distance itself from its most extreme elements.
True, but they can’t give up the extremists, because they represent a very large and loyal voting bloc. Give up the extremists, and you give up the election.
Long term, they need to do this. Short term, they can’t.
Their best hope is that the DOJ indicts Trump and prevents him from running. Then they can blame the Democrats, retain the crazies and hope to win in 2024.
I’m not very clear to me how the DOJ indicting Trump would prevent him from running. But that discussion might be more appropriate in a different thread.
I think the assumption is that, if Trump is either on trial or actually convicted and imprisoned by the time of the next election, he wouldn’t run for President and wouldn’t be nominated if he did. I’m not sure that assumption holds in the context of the modern Republican Party.
Certainly you CAN run for President while doing time; Eugene Debs got over a million votes that way in 1920, and didn’t have to worry about campaign travel expenses.
There is a potential issue with that. Actually 2
Suppose no member wants to be Speaker, could you force somebody to be Speaker?
And going along with that, it is basic Parliamentary Law that a member cannot lose their rights as member without a trial or other due process. Of course if you volunteer to be Chair, Speaker, President, etc. that is a different issue but I think forcing a member to be Speaker (thus losing their right since they are now the presiding officer) would be disallowed under a Point of Order. Otherwise why not force Joe Manchin to be President Pro Tempore of the Senate and anytime he threatens to go against the party, Vice-President Harris is conveniently absent and he is forced to preside (and not make motions, debate or vote).