the 2023 speaker of the house voting thread of implosion

[Francisco 2.0 32587]

 

 

[Constant 6886]

Santos hasn’t seen a fight for survival like this since he stirred the oxygen tanks on Apollo 13. 
 

 

[Francisco 2.0 32587]

This is not parody:

 

[Constant 6886]

Santos was heard comparing McCarthy’s leadership and inspirational qualities to the facilities manager from his playing days at Notre Dame. 

[DigglerontheHoof 21551]

So weird that dotard made this all about himself.  He almost never does that. 

[Dbeasy 15593]

Scalisi seems like a very bad option as speaker for the Democrats. Isn't there some path to electing a moderate candidate from the Republican Party? That would be a helluva shocking action, but actually might be good for the country.

[AnTiM 1695]

7 hours ago, Beau Vine said:

 

This ditchpig appears to be getting way more than her fair share of the popcorn and booze.

[Anastasis 23717]

8 hours ago, DDD Dad said:

Oh look, Anastasis is here to let us know he’s above it all. 

Unsurprised to see you pipe up and your knee jerk when someone mentions bed wetting. 
 

Speaking of the necessity for ongoing debt ceiling increases, this is just a small foretaste of what that negotiation is going to look like late summer. Leveraging a small numeric position to extract disproportionate concessions. 

Edited January 5, 2023 by Anastasis

[TheStoicPaisano 9953]

I hate that I know this goof’s cadence.

 

[Captainant 28533]

[Biff Tannen 46163]

2 hours ago, cactusflinthead said:

 

Justin Stapley is Anastasis?

[Huckleberry 34635]

10 minutes ago, TheStoicPaisano said:

I hate that I know this goof’s cadence.

 

Bipartisanship is "abhorrent" when Republicans have the majority. I'm sure it wouldn't be very difficult to find Higgins whining about the Democrats not coalition building across the aisle when the roles were reversed. 

[Francisco 2.0 32587]

https://www.politico.com/newsletters/playbook/2023/01/05/inside-mccarthys-brewing-speaker-deal-00076507?nname=playbook&nid=0000014f-1646-d88f-a1cf-5f46b7bd0000&nrid=0000014e-f0fd-dd93-ad7f-f8fde5bf0000&nlid=630318

 

Quote

After spending the last 48 hours on life support, KEVIN McCARTHY’s bid for the speakership is seeing a potential revival.

Following a rollercoaster of a Wednesday during which the California Republican failed three more times to secure the 218 votes for the gavel, McCarthy and some of his critics finally got in a room and had what both sides are describing as productive conversations.

This morning, after slamming coffee at midnight and working the phones until the wee hours, we have a readout of new concessions McCarthy has offered his critics and where things stand.

 

Quote

NEW CONCESSIONS ON THE TABLE: Here’s what’s being discussed, according to one well-placed source familiar with these talks. And, keep in mind, negotiations are ongoing and fluid:

A one-member “motion to vacate”: The GOP leader appears to have finally acquiesced to a demand to lower the threshold needed to force a vote ousting a speaker to just one member. While McCarthy originally indicated that restoring the one-member “motion to vacate” was a red line, his allies now argue that there’s not a huge practical difference between this and his previous offer of requiring five members to trigger the vote.

Rules Committee seats for the Freedom Caucus: McCarthy is prepared to give the House Freedom Caucus two seats on the powerful House Rules Committee, which oversees the amendment process for the floor. (Some conservatives are still holding out for four seats on the panel.) There are also talks about giving a third seat to a conservative close to the Freedom Caucus but not in it — someone like Reps. THOMAS MASSIE (R-Ky.). Who will pick those members? We’re told there is ongoing haggling. Typically, it’s the speaker’s prerogative, but conservatives want to choose their own members for these jobs.

A vote on term limits: This is a key demand of Rep. RALPH NORMAN (R-S.C.), who has proposed a constitutional amendment limiting lawmakers to three terms in the House.

Major changes to the appropriations process: Fears of another trillion-plus-dollar omnibus spending bill have been a major driver of the conservative backlash to McCarthy. The brewing deal includes a promise for standalone votes on each of the 12 yearly appropriations bills, which would be considered under what is known as an “open rule,” allowing floor amendments to be offered by any lawmaker. Conservatives also won a concession to carve out any earmarks included in those packages for separate votes, though it’s unclear if they’d be voted on as one package or separately.

 

Quote

The late-night exchange of paper followed anothermajor breakthrough for the GOP leader: The McCarthy-aligned Congressional Leadership Fund reached a deal with the conservative Club for Growth, which had initially signaled opposition to a Speaker McCarthy, to stay out of open House primaries for safe Republican seats. In the past, the two groups often found themselves at war with each other, with CLF pouring in millions to back establishment candidates while the Club endorsed those on the far right. In return for that promise, the Club has dropped its opposition to McCarthy.

THE MILLION-DOLLAR QUESTION: Will this be enough to land McCarthy the speakership? That’s TBD.

Rep. CHIP ROY (R-Texas) — who following a feisty Tuesday night TV exchange with Fox News’ LAURA INGRAHAM played a major role getting talks moving on Wednesday — indicated to GOP leaders that he could bring along as many as 10 McCarthy detractors, according to CNN’s Mel Zanona, and possibly even convince others to vote “present.” That won’t get him to 218, but McCarthy’s camp hopes it might just provide a final boost allowing him to close the gap after a hellish two days.

 

Spoiler

Still, even McCarthy’s closest allies say this isn’t over just yet.

One GOP leadership source told us they believe there are still five “hard nos” against him — Reps. MATT GAETZ (R-Fla.), LAUREN BOEBERT (R-Colo.), ANDY BIGGS (R-Ariz.), BOB GOOD (R-Va.) and MATT ROSENDALE (R-Mont.). Reminder: He can only lose four.
As he left the Capitol Wednesday night, Rep. Norman told reporters he hadn’t changed his position on opposing McCarthy. But the terms of this possible deal were still being ironed out at that point, and the nod to his own term-limits proposal might well change things.
McCarthy allies are also worried about freshman Rep. ELI CRANE (R-Ariz.), who we hear has shown no indication of moving.

As of 1 a.m., the thinking in McCarthy’s camp was that if they can winnow down his opposition from 20 to a half-dozen or so, the pressure on the remaining holdouts will be so great that enough will cave.

However, one McCarthy ally cautioned us that the situation could “get worse before it gets better.” There’s an expectation that McCarthy could actually lose a handful of votes from exasperated members if balloting continues today.

Meanwhile, time is running out as some McCarthy backers frustrated by the stalemate eye an exit strategy. Rep. PETE SESSIONS (R-Texas), a former Rules Committee chairman long considered an ally of GOP leadership, insisted on CNN last night that members should start discussing other potential speaker candidates, such as incoming House Majority Leader STEVE SCALISE (R-La.). “I’m telling you these 19 people are dug in,” he said of McCarthy’s foes, suggesting Republicans could only realistically tolerate about “three or four more rounds” of voting.

BUT BUT BUT … We’re told the wheeling and dealing probably isn’t over and may take a few days to nail down. “I still don’t see this getting resolved in the near term. Maybe more likely over the weekend and into next week,” cautioned one GOP lawmaker.

McCarthy’s camp also expects that he may eventually have to endorse conservatives for committee gavels, such as Rep. ANDY HARRIS (R-Md.), who’s pushing to lead the Health and Human Services subcommittee on Appropriations, or Rep. MARK GREEN (R-Tenn.), who’s gunning to lead the Committee on Homeland Security. (Those decisions are subject to the approval of the GOP steering committee, though McCarthy’s influence is significant.)

If the horsetrading goes that far, it’s bound to piss off many House Republicans who have been team players and supported McCarthy all along. Rep. DAN CRENSHAW (R-Texas), for example, also wants the Homeland Security gavel. But if push comes to shove, McCarthy may well sacrifice his backers’ ambitions to realize his own speakership dream.

That won’t sit well with centrists or even mainstream conservatives, who will no doubt argue that McCarthy is rewarding bad behavior. One senior Republican aide complained to us on Wednesday night that McCarthy’s concessions would undercut the party in the long run.

“He’s essentially given away all the power of the speakership. He’s making it to where these Freedom Caucus guys can stop anything they want,” the aide told us. “It’s a vanity project. This majority is going to be miserable. It’s just absurd what he’s given away to these guys just to be speaker when I’m sure there’s somebody in this conference that the Freedom Caucus would have accepted as speaker and not demanded all of these crazy changes.”

Meanwhile, there’s one wild card that has McCarthy’s camp more worried: “I think Gaetz and other [‘Never Kevin’ lawmakers] are going to blow this up,” one top McCarthy confidant told us last night. Indeed, on Wednesday night, Gaetz crashed negotiating sessions he was not invited to, per our colleague Olivia Beavers. Expect him to continue to stir the pot.

SO WHAT’S THE PLAN TODAY? The rebels and McCarthy and his whip team are slated to talk early this morning, after conservatives have had time to mull over his latest offers and scrutinize them on paper. The House will gavel in at noon to continue voting on the speakership. There’s been some talk about adjourning to continue negotiations, though they’d have to get a majority to do so.

Some have even floated postponing votes until next week — though others in the party have pushed back on that idea. “The optics of us leaving without a speaker would be really bad,” the Republican lawmaker mentioned above told us last night, arguing that constituents are blowing up their phones telling them to get their act together.

HOW WE GOT HERE: The potential breakthrough came at the end of what began as an abysmal day for McCarthy, with his speakership dreams seeming almost dead. Rep. VICTORIA SPARTZ (R-Ind.), who had previously supported McCarthy through multiple ballots, voted “present,” suggesting McCarthy was bleeding support.

Then Rep. KEN BUCK (R-Colo.), another McCarthy backer in the Freedom Caucus, set McCarthy allies scrambling after he told us off the chamber floor that the GOP leader needed to make a deal that day — or step aside and let someone like Scalise have a go. Within an hour, as he went on CNN to repeat those words, we spotted incoming Chief Deputy Whip GUY RESCHENTHALER (R-Pa.) standing off camera, waiting to corner Buck and try to muscle him back in line.

On the chamber floor, McCarthy’s whip team went to work, feverishly trying to win over some of his 20 detractors — and to discern which of them could still be won over with concessions. McCarthy also spent the evening meeting with freshman opponents who don’t have much of a relationship with him.

The chaotic scene underscoredthe absurdity of the entire situation. Republicans cheered when they got the votes to adjourn for the night, celebrating as if they’d just passed a massive tax cut deal when they were simply leaving once again without a speaker.

Buck at one point floated — quite seriously, in fact — that members host a meeting with booze, suggesting it might help move talks along. Upon entering a meeting, incoming NRCC Chairman RICHARD HUDSON (R-N.C.) joked that his water bottle was actually full of vodka. Down the hall, former Michigan Rep. JUSTIN AMASHnerded out about how great the standoff was, mused over how he wished it had occurred when he was in Congress — then pitched himself for speaker. Rep. JEFF VAN DREW, a petite former dentist from New Jersey often seen in pinstriped suits, argued that absent any agreement, the party’s leaders should “get everybody back in the caucus room and start beating the daylights out of each other until we get something.”

Expect just as much crazy today.

 

 

Edited January 5, 2023 by Francisco 2.0

[Judge Roybeanbag 11860]

Have you ever seen those pictures from Woodstock of people rolling around in their own muddy shit and claiming it was the greatest thing ever?  If so, these are those same people and this is a rerun.  

[Anastasis 23717]

11 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

Justin Stapley is Anastasis?

Was Justin commenting on how easily certain elements of the progressive wing rolled over under similar circumstances, and contrasting their concessions relative to the ones being made today?  Remind me what they extracted from Pelosi for their support? A commitment to serve no longer than 4 years, right? I haven't seen a comprehensive list of the fringe GOP wing demands, but a few that I saw floated were disproportionate representation on the rules committee, offering amendments from the floor, getting some of the pet bills up for vote, and ability to push a recall vote on the speaker with a single nomination. If there is a comprehensive listing of the concessions being negotiated, would like to see it. 

[SimonBolivar 11064]

27 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

Justin Stapley is Anastasis?

I don't know why I read that in this voice

Edited January 5, 2023 by SimonBolivar

[Nice Guy Eddie 13729]

McCarthy is willing to allow a one-person motion to vacate rule? So at any time a GOP rep will be able to call for a vote on the speaker? Given that someone will be that weekly if not daily thorn, I guess the House will just continuously vote so that McCarthy can be Speaker.

[WhatTheBuck 28929]

12 minutes ago, Judge Roybeanbag said:

Have you ever seen those pictures from Woodstock of people rolling around in their own muddy shit and claiming it was the greatest thing ever?  If so, these are those same people and this is a rerun.  

Well, no. That’s not exactly what happened at Woodstock. 

[Bookman 4760]

At this point McCarthy is damaged goods and he should withdraw.

[Pato del Muerto 53474]

8 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

McCarthy is willing to allow a one-person motion to vacate rule? So at any time a GOP rep will be able to call for a vote on the speaker? Given that someone will be that weekly if not daily thorn, I guess the House will just continuously vote so that McCarthy can be Speaker.

He needs the help in his winning %

[Fastbreak 4045]

Dems should switch strategy now and vote him in. He would be so weak at that point that he would be worthless (even more than now, if possible).

[Valmy77 13626]

In order for the Democrats to compromise the Republicans have to bring forth an acceptable candidate. One that accepts the results of the 2020 election as a minimum.

7 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

McCarthy is willing to allow a one-person motion to vacate rule? So at any time a GOP rep will be able to call for a vote on the speaker? Given that someone will be that weekly if not daily thorn, I guess the House will just continuously vote so that McCarthy can be Speaker.

It is going to ensure that there will not be any deals made with Biden by the Republican leadership even just to keep the lights on. That is the idea here I think. This enables the most celebrity chasing attention whoring Republican to steer the House. 

[Bateshorn 9991]

So there are a couple of things here at a meta level about how the house works:  The  GOP does not have an operating majority obviously. They are a minority government. 
 

Moving to a plurality potentially forces the hold out hands: Either Jefferies or McCarthy.  But that only picks a Speaker, which allows the Members to be Sworn in. 
 

Next is the rules package for the 118th Congress, which doesn’t exist yet.  But that suffers from the same problem: McCarthy has to either give the hold outs what they want, or he has to find votes from Jefferies, thus allowing the Democrats to ask for similar concessions in their direction.  And those concessions will look like a progressive mirror to the HFC: Equal membership on rules, no Jordan on Jusiciary, A vote for abortion rights, not using the debt limit as a negotiating mechanism, etc.

 

Conversely, Jefferies winning on a plurality has the same problem: he doesn’t have the votes to pass a rules package. 

[smuggs 9397]

1 hour ago, Anastasis said:

Speaking of the necessity for ongoing debt ceiling increases, this is just a small foretaste of what that negotiation is going to look like late summer. Leveraging a small numeric position to extract disproportionate concessions. 

Small Foretaste is a great band name.

[Judge Roybeanbag 11860]

6 minutes ago, WhatTheBuck said:

Well, no. That’s not exactly what happened at Woodstock. 

Like you would expect me to remember.  Hey, a squirrel !

[Judge Roybeanbag 11860]

8 minutes ago, Bateshorn said:

So there are a couple of things here at a meta level about how the house works:  The  GOP does not have an operating majority obviously. They are a minority government. 
 

Moving to a plurality potentially forces the hold out hands: Either Jefferies or McCarthy.  But that only picks a Speaker, which allows the Members to be Sworn in. 
 

Next is the rules package for the 118th Congress, which doesn’t exist yet.  But that suffers from the same problem: McCarthy has to either give the hold outs what they want, or he has to find votes from Jefferies, thus allowing the Democrats to ask for similar concessions in their direction.  And those concessions will look like a progressive mirror to the HFC: Equal membership on rules, no Jordan on Jusiciary, A vote for abortion rights, not using the debt limit as a negotiating mechanism, etc.

 

Conversely, Jefferies winning on a plurality has the same problem: he doesn’t have the votes to pass a rules package. 

Serious question, does any of it really matter if it can’t pass the senate?  

[Bateshorn 9991]

10 minutes ago, Judge Roybeanbag said:

Serious question, does any of it really matter if it can’t pass the senate?  

Well, that’s the most reductive question, but also the most on point:  unless something changes, you are looking at a nothing happens Congress.  Probably Best case scenario is we avoid a default and a shutdown (via a year long continuing resolution), pass a defense bill, and if really lucky, a farm bill, call it a day. 

Edited January 5, 2023 by Bateshorn

[Chuckie Finster 23058]

12 minutes ago, Judge Roybeanbag said:

Serious question, does any of it really matter if it can’t pass the senate?  

See, this is a question that assumes that the members of the House care more about the country than their own personal resume/ability to yell on television.  

[Js1 87179]

5 minutes ago, Bateshorn said:

Well, that’s the most reductive question, but also the most on point:  unless something changes, you are looking at a nothing happens Congress.  Probably Best case scenario is we avoid a default and a shutdown (via a year long continuing resolution), pass a defense bill, and if really lucky, a farm bill, call it a day. 

Meanwhile Biden gets 2 more years of uninterrupted Judicial picks 

[Bateshorn 9991]

Just now, Js1 said:

Meanwhile Biden gets 2 more years of uninterrupted Judicial picks 

I do a presentation on Congress where I mention that eventually all Senate’s run out of things to do and just become a nomination factory.  For this Senate, it’s already started.

[Neonmoon 38130]

40 minutes ago, Judge Roybeanbag said:

Serious question, does any of it really matter if it can’t pass the senate?  

Nope

Only things that will pass are bills that Dems can get enough non insane Rs to vote for, which is basically none 

[Hermanator 7667]

At this point why does McCarthy even want the job anymore? Even if he makes all these deals with the loons he still wouldn't be able to do shit once it actually gets to doing actual work. Any bill the loons put forth will just get smoked by the Senate or Biden anyway. 

If he had any balls he'd just say ok to the Gaetz and Boebert people and go to the Democrats and start negotiating there. It's gotta be easier to give some of what they want than it is to try negotiating with loonies who only want 100 percent cooperation with their nutty ideas. Plus it'll give a big middle finger to the freedom idiots that have fucked him over here. 

But of course none of these dumbasses has any balls.  

[ConferenceRoom 6214]

So he can hit Nancy with the gavel. 

[Valmy77 13626]

9 minutes ago, Neonmoon said:

Nope

Only things that will pass are bills that Dems can get enough non insane Rs to vote for, which is basically none 

Military stuff will usually bring large segments of both parties together.

But more importantly I don't think you can even bring bills to the floor unless the Speaker lets you under current rules, even if a majority of the House would vote for it.

[Js1 87179]

2 minutes ago, Valmy77 said:

Military stuff will usually bring large segments of both parties together.

But more importantly I don't think you can even bring bills to the floor unless the Speaker lets you under current rules, even if a majority of the House would vote for it.

Discharge petitions. Dems would just need to find 6 GOP to push something to the floor.  There’s 18 Biden-district Rs. 

[Ghost of LL 15698]

1 hour ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

McCarthy is willing to allow a one-person motion to vacate rule? So at any time a GOP rep will be able to call for a vote on the speaker? Given that someone will be that weekly if not daily thorn, I guess the House will just continuously vote so that McCarthy can be Speaker.

To @Hermanator's point, McCarthy will be a speaker in name only.  A "SINO," if you will.  I suppose he'll get the really great suite.  And he'll go down in Wikipedia as the Speaker of the House for the 118th Congress.  Hooray!  But he's not going to have any of the power that we've come to anticipate that a speaker would have.

The comparison with his predecessor is going to be really striking.

1 hour ago, Bateshorn said:

So there are a couple of things here at a meta level about how the house works:  The  GOP does not have an operating majority obviously. They are a minority government. 
 

Moving to a plurality potentially forces the hold out hands: Either Jefferies or McCarthy.  But that only picks a Speaker, which allows the Members to be Sworn in. 
 

Next is the rules package for the 118th Congress, which doesn’t exist yet.  But that suffers from the same problem: McCarthy has to either give the hold outs what they want, or he has to find votes from Jefferies, thus allowing the Democrats to ask for similar concessions in their direction.  And those concessions will look like a progressive mirror to the HFC: Equal membership on rules, no Jordan on Judiciary, A vote for abortion rights, not using the debt limit as a negotiating mechanism, etc.

 

Conversely, Jefferies winning on a plurality has the same problem: he doesn’t have the votes to pass a rules package. 

That's going to be the real interesting battle.  And because so few people actually pay attention to it, McCarthy would have a lot more room to maneuver on the rules package.  Nobody is going to get primaried because they voted for a rules package that got the support of some Democrats.

43 minutes ago, Bateshorn said:

Well, that’s the most reductive question, but also the most on point:  unless something changes, you are looking at a nothing happens Congress.  Probably Best case scenario is we avoid a default and a shutdown (via a year long continuing resolution), pass a defense bill, and if really lucky, a farm bill, call it a day. 

And Joe Biden runs in 2024 against a do-nothing Congress, which, historically is a pretty successful pitch.

[Biff Tannen 46163]

50 minutes ago, Bateshorn said:

 Probably Best case scenario is we avoid a default and a shutdown (via a year long continuing resolution)

Shit, this would be a major win, considering the circumstances.  Asking for more than this is just greedy at this point.

[Bateshorn 9991]

8 minutes ago, Js1 said:

Discharge petitions. Dems would just need to find 6 GOP to push something to the floor.  There’s 18 Biden-district Rs. 

Yup. But they take time to ripen. 

[Longhornfan1024 1707]

11 hours ago, Biff Tannen said:

What is HFC?

Hentucky Fried Chicken

[Judge Roybeanbag 11860]

25 minutes ago, Valmy77 said:

Military stuff will usually bring large segments of both parties together.

 

In particular:

 

• As of the 3rd quarter of calendar year 2022, actual inflation has exceeded what was expected by 9 percentage points since inflation began to rise in January 2021.
• From Fiscal Years (FY) 2021 to 2023, the total loss of buying power to the Department of Defense (DoD) from this unexpected inflation will exceed $110 billion dollars.
• Why we (and others care) is that this shortfall arrives at a potentially very dangerous time as we try to fund Ukraine, and deal with China, etc. – all the while the defense industrial base still suffers from COVID-19, supply chain, and workforce challenges, etc.
• Left unaddressed, DoD will, of course, continue to see issues with maintenance, cost overruns, lower readiness, etc.

 

Congress knows all of this and have heard it all year – and Dr. LaPlante (Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment) never followed up on specific guidance on what relief would be given. (Our educated guess on good sources is that he was counseled to punt, and let Congress give the initial guidance and instructing DoD to put a finer point on it 90 days after.) Hence, Section 822 (attached) was placed in the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2023 or FY23 NDAA.

 

The NDAA has been passed by both the House and the Senate, and President Biden should sign it within the week.

 

Obviously, I am no lawyer, and I am unsure how the amount changes impacts anyone directly, but Sec. 822 “Modification of Contracts to Provide Extraordinary Relief Due to Inflation Impacts” should (should) provide some relief  for contractors and subcontractors in fixed price contracts that are working to navigate contractual requirements under significantly increased inflationary and supply-chain pressures.  The below was gathered/collated from reading Sec. 822 and several other reference sources – but I would respectfully recommend putting your expert eye to it Matt for a closer look.  

 

When enacted (I don’t think there is any real risk of POTUS not signing it)  Section 822 will amend Title 50 to provide “extraordinary contractual relief” in several ways, including by increasing the approval and Congressional notification thresholds to $500,000 and $150,000,000, respectively. Notably, the new language makes clear that relief will be available to contractors and subcontractors and without additional consideration. Section 822 also provides that authority under the section begins when the law is enacted - and ends on December 31, 2023.

 

 

Edited January 5, 2023 by Judge Roybeanbag

[The Dog 44858]

 

[Bateshorn 9991]

Yeah, the conservatives don’t trust McCarthy on the Rules package, which is why we are doing this now. 

[Beau Vine 55863]

They gonna vote today or nah?

[The Royal We 3100]

3 minutes ago, Bateshorn said:

Yeah, the conservatives don’t trust McCarthy on the Rules package, which is why we are doing this now. 

Heading towards the roost.

[Bateshorn 9991]

3 minutes ago, Beau Vine said:

They gonna vote today or nah?

Dunno. According to the Beaver and Jake Sherman, he’s a wooing the GOP Moderates.

Edited January 5, 2023 by Bateshorn
Added GOP

[Macanudo 13318]

It's definitely not the Herpes Free Caucus.

[Bozo_Casanova 26847]

40 minutes ago, Hermanator said:

At this point why does McCarthy even want the job anymore?

I truly think it's a vanity project.

22 minutes ago, Bateshorn said:

Yup. But they take time to ripen. 

This is my concern - a government shutdown in 2024 is a foregone conclusion. The real worry is not being able to get a debt limit vote on the floor for a vote. 

Edited January 5, 2023 by Bozo_Casanova

[The Dog 44858]

1 minute ago, Bateshorn said:

Dunno. According to the Beaver and Jake Sherman, he’s a wooing the GOP Moderates.

he's pissing them off by caving to all of the HFC's demands. 

4 minutes ago, Beau Vine said:

They gonna vote today or nah?

they don't meet again until 11am central. so they either vote or adjourn again. 

[Pato del Muerto 53474]

They have to finish brunch before they even consider heading to the Capitol. 

[shakahorn 1656]

11 hours ago, Biff Tannen said:

What is HFC?

Hillary F. Clinton