Comments on: Newt Gingrich on Matt Gaetz’s move

By: R2L

R2L — Sat, 07 Oct 2023 01:58:01 +0000

Ditto on Art Deco’s question about Heritage, AEI, and ALEC.

By: om

om — Fri, 06 Oct 2023 22:09:38 +0000

Delilah and Wendybar:

Gaetz says Brandon impeachment hearings are a sham. Crickets?

“Cleanup on isle four.”

By: Delilah

Delilah — Fri, 06 Oct 2023 22:01:56 +0000

Gaetz is very popular with conservative voters. He calls out the RINOs, corruption, and stands up for the conservatives who were sick of McCarthy playing “nice” with the Dems, folding on issues important to GOP voters, and “business as usual”. We are sooooo far past the point of “respecting” congresscritters, because they don’t even pretend anymore to actually “represent” the wishes of their constituents. We’re sick of their crap.

By: Cicero

Cicero — Fri, 06 Oct 2023 16:44:25 +0000

Brian E:
Thanks for introducing facts and reality here.

By: Art Deco

Art Deco — Fri, 06 Oct 2023 10:23:36 +0000

1) R’s stink at writing genuine legislation (as opposed to what I call “sound bite” or “red meat” or “message” legislation–filing a bill that will never become law because it excites a part of your base). I would write my own, and leadership staff would complain that I wanted to file all these bills that would “never go anywhere.”
==
3) The D’s have a massive institutional advantage of think tanks, activist groups, etc. who actually WRITE legislation, and implementing regulations to go with it. (Want to know why all of a sudden Medicaid/Medicare will cover transgender hormones? Because Planned Parenthood, university activists, NGOs, unions, etc. will have already drafted and socialized the legislation within their networks, and gotten all of them to agreement, and agreed who will be the lead negotiator for all of them, so that when the moment strikes, a D legislator just has to put their name on it and file it).
==
OK. Can someone tell me what the employees of Heritage, AEI, and ALEC do all day?

By: wendybar

wendybar — Fri, 06 Oct 2023 09:28:24 +0000

HEAR!! HEAR!! Brian E @1:11 pm . Totally agree.

By: Philip Sells

Philip Sells — Fri, 06 Oct 2023 03:41:07 +0000

Thanks, former legislator, for that illumination.

I still don’t know what to make of the removal of McCarthy. I think I can see some sense in both sides of it.

By: R2L

R2L — Fri, 06 Oct 2023 02:22:35 +0000

Brian E on October 5, 2023 at 2:53 pm
Thank you for the clarifications from that NYT article. I was getting confused as to just what the real operative rule to initiate a vacate action was or would be, with McCarthy as Speaker. Allowing a single rep to initiate that might have been a dumb position to accept, but presumably he accepted it.

Bauxite on October 5, 2023 at 12:30 pm said:
“R2L – Isn’t that more or less what Paul Ryan tried? …” I don’t recall the details resulting from that, but I agree and recognize he and Alice Rivlin had put some compromise position together. I just don’t remember it doing any major good in reducing the debt/deficit situation.

From the Romney/Ryan ticket of 2012, I do recall Ryan acted like he and Mitt would be providing “leadership” on the entitlement 3rd rail, addressing it forthrightly for the American public. I was watching fairly closely for something meaningful to be proposed, and I did not see anything come forward later in the campaign. From my perspective it seems that they punted on their “leadership”
in that case, too. If someone recalls it differently, I welcome further clarification.

By: Anne

Anne — Fri, 06 Oct 2023 00:27:15 +0000

Dear Former Legislator:

I had such a good laugh over this I invited DH to come and read it. I thought he was going to cry! “It’s as sick as the Russian Duma!”

Thank you so much for taking the time to provide us with the necessary insight!

By: Brian E

Brian E — Thu, 05 Oct 2023 18:53:33 +0000

Jordan Rivers, Gingrich is full of hot air about this (a single representative calling for a vote on the Speaker). I think it’s needed to revisit the election of McCarthy. Part of the deal McCarthy made to win the Speakership was allowing a rule to be passed that made for the ‘snap vote.’

This wouldn’t have been possible, had McCarthy not agreed to it. It’s not inconsistent when McCarthy didn’t keep his promises regarding regular order, among other things. Had he kept his word, this wouldn’t have happened.

Twenty-one conservatives opposed McCarthy’s nomination. Eventually 15 of those representatives changed their votes to aye. The final six conservatives that only voted present allowed McCarthy to win. They should have held out– since the fact they couldn’t trust McCarthy proved to be true.

From a New York Times article:

“In the end, Mr. Crane, Representative Andy Biggs of Arizona, Representative Bob Good of Virginia and Mr. Rosendale all switched their votes to “present,” clearing the way for Mr. McCarthy to finally win the post that had so long eluded him. Mr. Gaetz again voted “present.”

The final tally was 216 for Mr. McCarthy and 212 for Representative Hakeem Jeffries of New York, the Democratic leader, with six, all Republicans, voting “present.”

With Mr. McCarthy elected, he immediately turned to swearing in the 434 members of the House to officially seat the 118th Congress. Republicans announced that they would wait until Monday to consider a package of rules for the chamber, which is expected to enshrine many of the compromises Mr. McCarthy made to win his post.

The concessions Mr. McCarthy agreed to, which he detailed in a party conference call early Friday, would diminish the speaker’s power considerably and make for an unwieldy environment in the House, where the slim Republican margin of control and the right-wing faction’s appetite for disarray had already promised to make it difficult to control.

“What we’re seeing is the incredibly shrinking speakership, and that’s most unfortunate for Congress,” former Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Democrat of California, said as she entered the chamber on Friday afternoon.

Mr. McCarthy agreed to allow a single lawmaker to force a snap vote at any time to oust the speaker, a rule that he had previously refused to accept, regarding it as tantamount to signing the death warrant for his speakership in advance.

Also part of the proposal, Republicans familiar with it said, was a commitment by the leader to give the ultraconservative faction approval over a third of the seats on the powerful Rules Committee, which controls what legislation reaches the floor and how it is debated. He also agreed to open government spending bills to a freewheeling debate in which any lawmaker could force votes on proposed changes.

Those compromises delivered a breakthrough for Mr. McCarthy, who in votes on Friday afternoon won support from a sizable chunk of the Republicans who had consistently refused to back him — though he remained short of the majority to win.

They included Representatives Dan Bishop of North Carolina, Josh Brecheen of Oklahoma, Michael Cloud of Texas, Andrew Clyde of Georgia, Byron Donalds and Anna Paulina Luna of Florida, Paul Gosar of Arizona, Andy Harris of Maryland, Mary Miller of Illinois, Ralph Norman of South Carolina, Andy Ogles of Tennessee, Scott Perry of Pennsylvania, and Chip Roy and Keith Self of Texas. Representative Victoria Spartz of Indiana, who had voted “present” in previous ballots, also voted for Mr. McCarthy in the 12th vote.

“You never get everything you’re looking for,” said Mr. Perry, explaining his vote to reporters, and noting that “the biggest win is the overall framework of it.”

“The motion to vacate is accountability,” he added, referring to the measure allowing a snap vote to remove the speaker.”