Congress Catch-All

  • Thread starter Thread starter nycfan
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 635
  • Views: 24K
  • Politics 
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:
nycfan said:




I am the one who tanked this and is making last second demands at 1:16 am but it is Biden’s fault!!
Click to expand...

And I am sure in one month from now everyone will be going out of their way to blame Biden for whatever is happening because the media spotlight will be so glaring on him and not the orange attention whoring asshole living int he White House. let's see how that works.
 
Trump doubled down on his desire for a debt limit patch today, telling NBC News’ Garrett Haake that he’s keen to get rid of the limit entirely, not just raise the ceiling: “Democrats have said they want to get rid of it. If they want to get rid of it, I would lead the charge,” Trump said. “It doesn’t mean anything, except psychologically.”
 

Johnson says plan C reached to avert shutdown, vote expected​


“Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) said Republicans have arrived at a plan C to avert a shutdown and the House will vote Friday morning on the legislation.

“Yeah, yeah, we have a plan,” Johnson said Friday morning as he entered the Capitol. “We’re expecting votes this morning, so you all stay tuned. We’ve got a plan.”

He did not say what it entails.

Developing.”
 
heelslegup said:
Trump doubled down on his desire for a debt limit patch today, telling NBC News’ Garrett Haake that he’s keen to get rid of the limit entirely, not just raise the ceiling: “Democrats have said they want to get rid of it. If they want to get rid of it, I would lead the charge,” Trump said. “It doesn’t mean anything, except psychologically.”
Click to expand...
Seems as if Trump and his minions in Congress and elsewhere are aggressively trying to trap Democrats into supporting measures that will allow Republicans to make major budget cuts and then blame Democrats for it after Trump takes office. "See, those nasty Democrats wouldn't raise the budget ceiling, so now we've got to make cuts to your Social Security and Medicare and Medicaid. Don't blame us, blame them, it's all their fault as usual!"
 
Threatening to primary every single Republican who doesn't do what you say (even before you return to office) isn't a policy that will win friends. Especially when they realize that 1) they only have a 2 seat majority and 2) Trump is a lame duck immediately.
 
uncmba said:
Threatening to primary every single Republican who doesn't do what you say (even before you return to office) isn't a policy that will win friends. Especially when they realize that 1) they only have a 2 seat majority and 2) Trump is a lame duck immediately.
Click to expand...
Trump doesn’t think winning friends has any relevance to his preferred form of governance. He’s much more comfortable with enemies than with friends. Always has been.
 
lawtig02 said:
Trump doesn’t think winning friends has any relevance to his preferred form of governance. He’s much more comfortable with enemies than with friends. Always has been.
Click to expand...
He's transactional. A friend is someone who praises him and does what he wants. An enemy is someone who does not.
 
HeelingAg said:
Ttump isn’t looking at a four year timeline. There’s no reason to believe ttump will adhere to term limits, he’s said as much already. Never forget that ttump has no true sense of humor, every “joke” is an admission.
Click to expand...
Trump is a pathological liar and he says a lot of dumb things, but he also jokes a lot... and the most worrisome liberals are often unable to distinguish between his general idiocy and his joking. He's not running for a 3rd term. He's not going to refuse to leave office. He's going to do his 2nd term and leave office because there's no way in hell Republicans will ever.... EVER even attempt to do something as dumb as pushing for a constitutional change to allow more than 2 terms.

President-elect Donald Trump, during a meeting with House Republicans on Wednesday, made an apparent joke in which he remarked that the GOP might want to “do something” that would somehow allow him to serve a third term in 2028.

“I suspect I won’t be running again, unless you do something,” Trump said, according to audio shared with The Hill. “Unless you say, ‘He’s so good, we have to just figure it out.’”

Trump’s remarks garnered some laughs from the GOP lawmakers, a couple of whom dismissed them as a joke. But Trump has made similar comments in the past, having previously floated the ideas of “extending” his term or somehow disregarding term limits.

 
Last edited:
The first time since the election that I'm starting to feel pretty good. Didn't think there would be many checks on Trump. But if its true, that this Speaker has never passed anything without Democratic votes.........then we can work with that and check Trump I would think.
 
BlueSmoke said:
The first time since the election that I'm starting to feel pretty good. Didn't think there would be many checks on Trump. But if its true, that this Speaker has never passed anything without Democratic votes.........then we can work with that and check Trump I would think.
Click to expand...
Doubt it. I think it just means Johnson’s remaining days are very few. But the chaos and incompetence may continue, and that could be a good thing relatively speaking.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top