Congress Catch-All | House passes CR, no debt ceiling change

  • Thread starter Thread starter nycfan
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 443
  • Views: 8K
  • Politics 
nycfan said:
When a producer for Tucker Carlson accused Rep. Dan Crenshaw (R-TX) of “spearheading” the effort to derail the short term spending bill, Crenshaw blew up at him: “Yeah or maybe you’re a fucking lying piece of shit because I’m not even on the YES list for the whip team. Never have been. But hey, whatever gets you pathetic bottom feeders your click bait. Fucking incels.”
Click to expand...
Is this an example of a breakdown of super's substantive and procedural decorum or decorum in form?
 
Vote pending in House tonight but currently expected to fail as about 70 Republicans revolt on the debt ceiling.
 
altmin said:
Jeffries shouldn't deliver a single vote at this point.
Click to expand...
I'm with you. There was a deal. Trump commanded Rs to rip it up. Rs ripped it up.

Let the Rs in Congress understand early that there is a price to abandoning a bipartisan agreement to appease Trump. The negotiating positions have changed. Ds cannot fall back to the earlier bipartisan deal.
 
TangledUpInBlue06 said:
I'm not steeped in legislative procedure and I don't have the time or energy to do any real research, but I can't imagine the absence of an elected Speaker could derail the electoral process. The 12th Amendment and 3 USC 15 are pretty clear about the procedure for counting electoral votes and neither requires any real role for the Speaker. Both do say, however, that the President of the Senate shall preside and open the votes.
Click to expand...
It could be a problem as the WSJ a year ago (01-06-2023) noted below:

Congress has since passed a law that clarifies the vice president’s role is merely ceremonial, and made other changes designed to make it harder for lawmakers to object to states’ electoral votes, but it didn’t address a hypothetical scenario in which there might be no speaker or sworn members.
Without a speaker, the House’s newly elected members are unable to be sworn in to office, or conduct any other business beyond tedious voice votes, as the House clerk, who is presiding, calls out hundreds of lawmakers’ names one by one, in alphabetical order.
Sarah Binder of the Brookings Institution said in past protracted speakership elections, there were times when a majority of the House decided to change the election rule for the speaker from a majority to a plurality, so there’s precedent that the House can do some bare bones motions. But she said it’s uncertain how the lack of a speaker – who is supposed to submit any electoral count objections to the House for its consideration – would affect the process of ratifying presidential results.
“Thank goodness, we don't have to certify any Electoral College results this week, because we wouldn't be able to," said Rep. Ted Lieu (D., Calif.).
Rep. Emanuel Cleaver (D., Mo.) said he didn’t have any idea what would happen in two years if there was no speaker or functioning House on Jan. 6.
“And I bet nobody else does either,” he said. “There is no contingency … I mean, over the last three or four years we've been going in and out of unexplored territory.”
 
I suppose if somehow the Republicans can't select a Speaker by noon on January 20, 2025, then Senator Murray would be inaugurated. Works for me.

Now we laugh at such an outlandish outcome, but I bet there are at least a couple Representatives that will demand a King's ransom in exchange for their votes once they realize the power they hold.
 
BlueSmoke said:
It could be a problem as the WSJ a year ago (01-06-2023) noted below:

Congress has since passed a law that clarifies the vice president’s role is merely ceremonial, and made other changes designed to make it harder for lawmakers to object to states’ electoral votes, but it didn’t address a hypothetical scenario in which there might be no speaker or sworn members.
Without a speaker, the House’s newly elected members are unable to be sworn in to office, or conduct any other business beyond tedious voice votes, as the House clerk, who is presiding, calls out hundreds of lawmakers’ names one by one, in alphabetical order.
Sarah Binder of the Brookings Institution said in past protracted speakership elections, there were times when a majority of the House decided to change the election rule for the speaker from a majority to a plurality, so there’s precedent that the House can do some bare bones motions. But she said it’s uncertain how the lack of a speaker – who is supposed to submit any electoral count objections to the House for its consideration – would affect the process of ratifying presidential results.
“Thank goodness, we don't have to certify any Electoral College results this week, because we wouldn't be able to," said Rep. Ted Lieu (D., Calif.).
Rep. Emanuel Cleaver (D., Mo.) said he didn’t have any idea what would happen in two years if there was no speaker or functioning House on Jan. 6.
“And I bet nobody else does either,” he said. “There is no contingency … I mean, over the last three or four years we've been going in and out of unexplored territory.”
Click to expand...
Interesting, and thanks for the info. I can't imagine it becoming an issue, but then again a lot I couldn't imagine has happened.
 




I am the one who tanked this and is making last second demands at 1:16 am but it is Biden’s fault!!
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top