the 2023 speaker of the house voting thread of implosion

[Bozo_Casanova 26492]

 

35 minutes ago, The Dog said:

 

I wish the Texas State Senate had figured that out, and based on what I'm hearing a lot of them wish they had too. 

[Biff Tannen 45691]

1 hour ago, ConferenceRoom said:

Let me guess: CNN let him get away with it, too. Zero pushback whatsoever? 

She pushed back about five times and then finally had to let it go.  It's why you can't argue with these people.  Honestly, she should have just said, "if you're going to be disingenuous and lie to people about how this process really works, we're going to end the interview".

[Js1 85418]

11 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

"if you're going to be disingenuous and lie to people about how this process really works, we're going to end the interview".

I wish they would, but they'd probably be reassigned because they'd never be able to book another politician to interview with them. 

[The Dog 44063]

 

[Dbeasy 15068]

Don’t know if anyone heard, but a new candidate has entered the speaker race: Devon McMarty. 
 

[ohchaucer 1443]

Looks like he might hold a press conference

Gene Parmesan!

[TwiceHorn 31497]

43 minutes ago, Horn Dogg said:

Is that the same guy that makes 100 year decisions for aggy?

I know you're going for lulz, but please don't conflate the magnificent lilttle Leslie Jordan with that turd Loftin.

Chraist!

[Js1 85418]

5 minutes ago, The Dog said:

 

Those aren't terrible reforms.

But his premise is wrong - the people ARE the problem in Congress, because it's full of non-serious hacks, fame whores and drooling morons that perfectly represent the American people. 

[Bozo_Casanova 26492]

3 minutes ago, Js1 said:

Those aren't terrible reforms.

But his premise is wrong - the people ARE the problem in Congress, because it's full of non-serious hacks, fame whores and drooling morons that perfectly represent the American people. 

It's behind the paywall - can somebody sumarize?

[Bozo_Casanova 26492]

Mike Collins (R, GA 10) Has jokes that are kinda funny

 

Edited October 18, 2023 by Bozo_Casanova

[Js1 85418]

3 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

It's behind the paywall - can somebody sumarize?

Weird. I was able to read it, but now I'm not

Quote

Change the Congressional Calendar

In order to redirect our energy toward the things Congress is actually supposed to do—oversight and deliberation—legislators need to change how we spend our time. Right now, a traditional congressional workweek involves flying into D.C. on a Monday or Tuesday night for a noncontroversial “suspension” vote (renaming a post office or passing a nonbinding resolution), being in session for two or three days, and then flying home as soon as votes are over on Thursday or Friday morning. As a result, in 2017, members of the House were in session for only 145 out of 261 workdays, far fewer than what the average American works.

This schedule not only costs the taxpayer a lot of money for extraneous back-and-forth travel, but also costs members of Congress time. Those days that are spent in D.C. tend to be crowded with fund-raising for reelection, leaving members little time to develop meaningful relationships, particularly on a bipartisan basis, that might form the foundation for legislative collaboration.

Rather than flying back and forth for two- or three-day workweeks, members of Congress could stay in session for three consecutive weeks, each with at least five full-session days, to be followed by one week back in the district. Not only would this facilitate more time for legislators to legislate, but it would allow them to spend more quality time back in their districts.

Yes, members of Congress would complain—since the 1990s, it has become standard practice not to move one’s family to D.C., for fear of seeming swampy. They might also find attending their committee hearings and reading the bills they vote on more boring than the performance art they currently practice. But boring isn’t necessarily bad. A Congress that simply went about performing its core legislative functions with greater diligence and fewer fund-raisers would be good for the country.

Quote

Change How We Choose Committee Chairs

One way to keep rank-and-file members of Congress from rebelling against this schedule change is to give them something meaningful to do while trapped in the swamp. This means granting them more power. Congressional leadership maintains control not only by governing the calendar, but also through the Steering Committee, the body that chooses committee chairmen and committee members. About a quarter of the committee’s votes are controlled by the House speaker and the majority leader, and thus the committee tends to grant chairmanships to members who have demonstrated to the leadership that they are “team players.” One becomes a team player not by demonstrating policy expertise or legislative skill, but by consistently voting with the leadership.

Another way to become a team player is to raise money for the National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC) or the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC)—the party organizations tasked with winning elections. Top-level committee assignments are generally given to top fund-raisers, and are themselves coveted for how helpful they are to one’s own fund-raising. (If you want to raise a lot of money from Wall Street, get on the Financial Services Committee.) Furthermore, the dues that members have to pay to the NRCC or the DCCC vary in proportion to the fund-raising value of their committees. Thus, an ambitious politician who wants to get on a powerful committee must pay to do so. If this seems like a bizarre pay-to-play scheme, that’s because it is. House leaders may think this scheme is necessary to enforce fund-raising discipline, but in so doing, they channel members’ energy away from legislative work.

One of the simplest ways to get members to burn more calories on their actual jobs would be to have committee members choose their own chairmen. This would change the entire incentive structure in Congress. To have any chance of becoming chairman one day, ambitious members would first need to prove themselves as productive citizens of a committee. Rather than spending all their time dialing for dollars, they would be expected to show up to their committee hearings, to understand their committee’s issues, and to work with their colleagues to advance bills.

Instead of doing the leadership’s bidding, committee chairs would have to exercise their own leadership—by listening to the concerns of their committee members, exercising competent oversight, and forging difficult compromises on complex issues. These effects would be mutually reinforcing. Committee members’ ambitions would flow toward demonstrating legislative competence to their chairman, and the chairman’s ambitions would flow toward responding to his committee members’ legislative concerns.

Quote

Streamline Committee Jurisdiction

Some committees almost operate in this way already. I am lucky to serve on the House Armed Services Committee, where every year, after months of oversight and debate, we mark up the National Defense Authorization Act. The committee has its share of vicious disagreements and some drama, but for 58 years in a row, the final bill has passed with an overwhelmingly bipartisan margin because the committee members feel the process is honest. They also feel a sense of duty, both to the defense of the country and to the tradition of the committee.

But this is the exception that proves the rule. The current division between authorization (how much money can be spent and what it can be spent on) and appropriations (actually giving the money to the appropriate program or agency) goes back to the days of John Quincy Adams. But in recent years it has become a recipe for shutdowns, continuing resolutions, and gigantic omnibus bills. Even when we authorizers devote ourselves to our committee work, we are still at the mercy of the all-powerful Appropriations Committee (and by extension, House leadership), which ultimately decides where taxpayer money goes. It often appropriates funds to programs that the relevant committees haven’t authorized. This is due in part to the fact that the 20 standing committees in the House form a tangled jurisdictional web, which complicates oversight and produces power struggles between chairmen. The problem is most acute when it comes to health care, over which seven committees have overlapping jurisdiction, each with its own parochial interests. No wonder health care continues to confuse legislators into inaction.

We need to end the jurisdictional “game of thrones” by simplifying the committee structure. I propose reducing the total number of committees to better correspond with the number of major executive-branch departments and agencies. Critically, health care could be consolidated into a single House Health Committee, which would be positioned to take a more holistic view of our health-care system. At the same time, in order to jump-start our stalled budgetary and appropriations procedures, the Appropriations Committee should be dissolved and its duties reassigned among the standing committees. These committees would both authorize the activities of the executive-branch agencies they oversee and appropriate the taxpayer money necessary to carry out these activities.

Appropriators and powerful chairmen hate these ideas because they fear losing power. But these proposals would actually make each committee more powerful and the work of each member more meaningful. Streamlining the committee process would also allow Congress to concentrate staff resources, better equipping committees to face off against the executive-branch bureaucrats they are charged with overseeing.

 

[The Dog 44063]

1 hour ago, Macanudo said:

There is no reasonable candidate.   Any moderate Republican who has voted for Jordan is coward.  

keep in mind there are many voting for Jordan (knowing he will lose) with the intent to switch to against him in subsequent rounds in order to humiliate him. 

[Ted Lange 16110]

9 minutes ago, Js1 said:

Those aren't terrible reforms.

But his premise is wrong - the people ARE the problem in Congress, because it's full of non-serious hacks, fame whores and drooling morons that perfectly represent the American people. 

Ultimately yes.  But how much of this comes down to gerrymandering and uncompetitive districts, where the only way to win is to keep going further right.   How many of the loony tunes reps come from districts that are R +15 or whatever.   I dont know the answer, but Id guess it is a big portion.

[The Dog 44063]

1 minute ago, Ted Lange said:

How many of the loony tunes reps come from districts that are R +15 or whatever.

just a sampling of kooks:

MTG  R+22

Gaetz  R+19

Jordan R+20

Ronny Jackson R+26

 

[C-Man 27230]

1 hour ago, The Dog said:

the issue for them would be their voting history and they would be easy targets for being primaried from the left. in order to do a switch they would need guarantees that wouldn't happen (at least for 2024). 

the most logical scenario would be for them to simply become independent. In order for that to work each would need to have a brand strong enough in their district(s) along with the financial infrastructure to hold onto the job without the benefit of a major political party's backing. 

I mean it is technically true that McCarthy was ousted because the entire Democratic caucus went along with the vote to vacate. 

The problem is that the Republicans' dysfunction and infighting being played out in public is now dominating the news cycle, so any attempts to pin this on the Democrats is going to fall flat. Even right wing media isn't buying that narrative. 

Actually, if congressional districts were drawn with any sense of normalcy -- and not ridiculous gerrymandering -- they might be in better shape to hold their office IF (and this is a big IF) they weren't complete fucksticks in the legislative process.

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

 

I wish the Texas State Senate had figured that out, and based on what I'm hearing a lot of them wish they had too. 

Can you throw some details in the Tx Lege thread? Is there some buyer's remorse?

[SydneyCarton 48110]

56 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

She pushed back about five times and then finally had to let it go.  It's why you can't argue with these people.  Honestly, she should have just said, "if you're going to be disingenuous and lie to people about how this process really works, we're going to end the interview".

 

44 minutes ago, Js1 said:

I wish they would, but they'd probably be reassigned because they'd never be able to book another politician to interview with them. 

What JS1 said. Dude would have zero problem never being interviewed again, he'd just immediately blast CNN as liberal media on twitter and then fund raise off it. 

[Biff Tannen 45691]

And this is why we can't have nice things.

[softlynow 1816]

1 hour ago, henrygandorf said:

they can't govern for shit.  they can't lead, they can't budget, they can't pass legislation.  they're braindead mules and illiterate toddlers.

but when it comes to obstruction, they're master fucking strategists.

No, they know the media are their willing allies. The same media they disparage incessantly are as spineless, incopetent and complicit as everyone else involved in our current predicament. The journalistic standards that evolved in the age of Murrow are insufficient in an age where one party is nihilist. Add in that journalists are all chasing clicks seeking sweet 7-figure TV gigs, along with the fact that the owners of mass media are all happy to have the tax-cuts-are-magic folks in power, and you get 24-hour both-siderism that the billionaire class is only too happy to exploit.

They truly are morons, but a moron with the settings on mouth-breather and all the cheat codes at the ready can still beat most video games. Put another way, hand Greg Davis the '99 Rams or '07 Patriots and he'll likely win more than his fair share.

[The Dog 44063]

 

[YGIFS 19452]

Jim “Flick” Jordan. 

[The Dog 44063]

YYEEEEAAAARRRGGGGHHHH

 

[Bookman 4639]

Has Fox News started blaming Dominion yet?

[Js1 85418]

Drugs are bad, mmkay

[Longhorn_Fan68 33874]

lol, fucking clowns. glad the dems are monolithic here

[Js1 85418]

Just now, Longhorn_Fan68 said:

lol, fucking clowns. glad the dems are monolithic here

The irony that the GOP usually falls in line and the Dems fall in love. Not this time 

[Ted Lange 16110]

13 minutes ago, The Dog said:

YYEEEEAAAARRRGGGGHHHH

 

Has it been decades since Dennis Hastert was the speaker?

Edited October 18, 2023 by Ted Lange

[The Dog 44063]

 

[Ghost of LL 15539]

In the earlier bits of the Revolution, there was a brief time during which there were real proposals for the George III to retain sovereignty over the Colonies while restricting Parliament's authority.  The proposal was about 90 years ahead of its time--it was essentially the formula that was followed with the 1867 North America Act that created the Dominion of Canada.

Anyway, I think of that frequently these days as we repeatedly demonstrate the superiority of the parliamentary form of government.  

And really, it's never to late to admit a mistake.  Rescind the Declaration of Independence, and have the Republicans notify the King that they cannot form a government so that he can dissolve Congress and call a general election.

[Pato del Muerto 52527]

31 minutes ago, The Dog said:

YYEEEEAAAARRRGGGGHHHH

 

So did he vote for him last year?

[tx 3 putt 77075]

1 hour ago, C-Man said:

Actually, if congressional districts were drawn with any sense of normalcy -- and not ridiculous gerrymandering -- they might be in better shape to hold their office IF (and this is a big IF) they weren't complete fucksticks in the legislative process.

[LCHorn 2621]

8 minutes ago, Ghost of LL said:

Anyway, I think of that frequently these days as we repeatedly demonstrate the superiority of the parliamentary form of government. 

Funny, I had that same thought before taking a global politics class at UT.  They have their own issues with two recent examples highlighted by Britain and Israel.  

[softlynow 1816]

8 minutes ago, Ghost of LL said:

In the earlier bits of the Revolution, there was a brief time during which there were real proposals for the George III to retain sovereignty over the Colonies while restricting Parliament's authority.  The proposal was about 90 years ahead of its time--it was essentially the formula that was followed with the 1867 North America Act that created the Dominion of Canada.

Anyway, I think of that frequently these days as we repeatedly demonstrate the superiority of the parliamentary form of government.  

And really, it's never to late to admit a mistake.  Rescind the Declaration of Independence, and have the Republicans notify the King that they cannot form a government so that he can dissolve Congress and call a general election.

Charles III would probably show his contempt for us and hand that authority over to the Duchess of Sussex.

[Bozo_Casanova 26492]

27 minutes ago, Ghost of LL said:

In the earlier bits of the Revolution, there was a brief time during which there were real proposals for the George III to retain sovereignty over the Colonies while restricting Parliament's authority.  The proposal was about 90 years ahead of its time--it was essentially the formula that was followed with the 1867 North America Act that created the Dominion of Canada.

Anyway, I think of that frequently these days as we repeatedly demonstrate the superiority of the parliamentary form of government.  

And really, it's never to late to admit a mistake.  Rescind the Declaration of Independence, and have the Republicans notify the King that they cannot form a government so that he can dissolve Congress and call a general election.

You laugh, but somewhere between Wichita Falls and Lubbock a meeting of Constitutional Sherrifs is convening right now to dissolve Congress and restore King Trump to the Throne of Soloman. Are you some kind of Admiralty Lawyer or something?

Edited October 18, 2023 by Bozo_Casanova

[RDCanecutter 26453]

Just now, Bozo_Casanova said:

You laugh, but somewhere between Wichita Falls and Lubbock a meeting of Constitutional Sherrifs is convening right now to dissolve Congress and restore King Trump to the Throne of Soloman. Are you some kind of Admiralty Lawyer or something?

Dammit, I TOLD them if we let you in, you'd start bragging about what you know.

[tx 3 putt 77075]

8 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

You laugh, but somewhere between Wichita Falls and Lubbock a meeting of Constitutional Sherrifs is convening right now to dissolve Congress and restore King Trump to the Throne of Soloman. Are you some kind of Admiralty Lawyer or something?

https://www.texastribune.org/2023/01/13/constitutional-sheriffs-texas/

 

Quote

Last summer, the sheriff of Coryell County in Central Texas took to an elevated platform in a small Las Vegas ballroom and made an unusual announcement: He was a “born-again sheriff,” he said, having “realized that I wasn’t doing my job 100%.”

In Vegas, he told the audience that he wanted to protect America from “globalists that are coming to destroy our nation,” saying “the moment we start acting like we are Americans, we are going to take our country back.”

 

Edited October 18, 2023 by tx 3 putt

[G650 14263]

25 minutes ago, softlynow said:

Charles III would probably show his contempt for us and hand that authority over to the Duchess of Sussex.

[Surly Bevo 25053]

In the earlier bits of the Revolution, there was a brief time during which there were real proposals for the George III to retain sovereignty over the Colonies while restricting Parliament's authority.  The proposal was about 90 years ahead of its time--it was essentially the formula that was followed with the 1867 North America Act that created the Dominion of Canada.
Anyway, I think of that frequently these days as we repeatedly demonstrate the superiority of the parliamentary form of government.  
And really, it's never to late to admit a mistake.  Rescind the Declaration of Independence, and have the Republicans notify the King that they cannot form a government so that he can dissolve Congress and call a general election.

King Charles if this came across his desk

[Covri 6249]

[atomheartbevo 89732]

5 hours ago, Satchel said:

Why are Gaetz, MTG, and Granny so quiet? Up until very recently, the most dangerous place in Washington was the space between them and a TV camera or microphone. Where are they?

4 hours ago, Js1 said:

A good question, actually 

Probably scared shitless that whatever Republican actually wins will punish them in some way, so they gotta keep quiet.  Gaetz fucked up with that fundraising email last night.

[CTC2 2797]

4 hours ago, Macanudo said:

There is no reasonable candidate.   Any moderate Republican who has voted for Jordan is coward.  

Looking at you Mike McCaul. 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

 

[UTGrad98 2280]

Leopards eating faces. 

[LCHorn 2621]

Count me among the unsympathetic; a) the death threats are coming from your supposed “allies” and b) in 2023 death threats just come with the job.  
 

 

[Js1 85418]

Probably came from a Florida, Georgia and Colorado number. Someone let Granny get into the liquor cabinet again 

[tx 3 putt 77075]

 

[cactusflinthead 27601]

Obligatory picture of pizza delivery meant to signify a willingness to stay at the designated location to gather for work.

Actual significance

Ongoing hostage situation

 

[Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand 13585]

Wasn't the NSA supposed to be collecting everyone's internet and phone data? It seems the level of anonymous threats in today's political environment wouldn't be possible if this were the case, or if it wasn't  just allowed to happen. 

[atomheartbevo 89732]

18 minutes ago, UTGrad98 said:

Leopards eating faces. 

18 minutes ago, LCHorn said:

Count me among the unsympathetic; a) the death threats are coming from your supposed “allies” and b) in 2023 death threats just come with the job.  

Republicans are exactly who they said they were. None of them voted for Pelosi, but they expect Dems to vote for Jordan, and when votes don't go the way Gym wants them to, of course his allies are exactly the kind of people that will threaten other Republicans and call them "RINOs".

[YGIFS 19452]

If I could just remind Rep. Miller-Meeks.  The guy you support for President, who is behind the threats to your family for going against his pick for Speaker of your House.  Yeah, uh...he has casually mentioned murdering the former President of the United States, General Flynn, and a number of high profile judges.  And somehow you thought, as a Congresswoman with no national profile and garbage committee assignments from (checks notes), Davenport, Iowa...would somehow be beyond the reach of him and his minions.  You are one seriously dumb cunt.

Edited October 19, 2023 by YGIFS