The saga continues...
and now ends with a new Speaker. This should close out this thread. Goodbye with this one until and/or if something changes that may bring it back.
10/25/23 (before vote): Update on 10/20/23 post:
There are reports that McCarthy floated a co-Speakership idea.
He just won't let go.
Pro-Life Congressman Mike Johnson Becomes New Republican Speaker Nominee
end update:
10/20/23: Update on 10/18/23 post:
"
No Speaker isn't so bad." Couldn't have said it better meself.
end update
10/18/23: Update on yesterday's post:
Looks like an impasse is developing. Nevertheless, I remain of the same opinion. The main body of the GOP should stick to their guns. If the so-called "moderates" bolt to the Democrats, then let them go. We don't need that type around.
end update
10/17/23, 6:53 PM: Daily update(s):
(2)
This is ridiculous. McCarthy is history. So they are going to blow it all up just because of that guy? As for maybe 2 of the 20 holdouts, they are from Texas, they are newbies. The third one from Texas is a long timer, so changing her vote is unlikely. The newbies are maybe being used as "human shields" to keep the heat off the real culprits. I'll dig a little deeper on that.
“Until we can find clear consensus among the Republican Conference, it’s time to give expanded authority to Speaker Pro Tempore McHenry so the House can resume governing,” Rep. Lori Chavez-DeRemer (R-OR), who opposes Jordan’s speakership, said in a statement. “In the meantime, I’m supporting Kevin McCarthy because he’s the only member who’s received anywhere close to the 217 votes needed to select a speaker. I’ll continue to reassess where things stand as this process plays out.”
----source
Washington Examiner
In the case of the Lori Chavez-DeRemer, yes she is a newbie. ; John James is another newbie, that's at least 4 now. Bacon is a vet, so that's two vets. Lawler of New York is a newbie, but he has a big mouth. So far, 5 newbies and 2 vets. There are those who had upsets in New York. Lawler is one of them.
Politico has a bit more info on who the holdouts are.
end (2):
(1)12:14 PM
The last time I checked, the reasons given for refusing to support Jordan for Speaker seem to follow the Marxist dialectic. As I have written many times, that is not a valid reason for any sincere conservative to reject Jordan. Indeed, it isn't a valid reason at all.
There is an investigation into the events of January 6th that McCarthy kinda sorta supported. If the wannabe Democrats in the GOP caucus want to join the other Democrats in cancelling that investigation, or causing it to be stifled and defeated, then that's the real reason. That's because that's the price that will be demanded for Democrat support.
There's also a priority that is claimed for reestablishing regular order as opposed to continuing resolutions to fund the government. If these guys join the Democrats, then that's the end of that priority too.
In other words, it will be another total surrender. The GOP will get nothing. It will be another failure theater.
For once, the GOP needs to stand firm. It is no time to go wobbly. But I suspect that it could happen. I haven't checked the news since the last hour or so as I write this. Kinda bass ackwards, eh?
end update (1)
10/17/23: Update on 10/15/23 post
After scanning the webs, and thinking it all over, I am still of the same opinions. Under no circumstances that I can foresee, should McCarthy
be allowed to return to the Speaker's chair. If some GOP'ers want to cross the aisle and join the Democrats, then do it. This is a fight that must take place. I'm sick of the lies.
If they join the Democrats on this, they can just about torpedo everything that the majority of the caucus wants. The same was true of Gaetz, yes. But the representation does not fit what the voters want. If those Republicans think that they better represent their district by joining the Democrats, then by all means join them. In my opinion, this clarifies things.
Let the voters decide on the results come next November. That is, if we can get an honest vote. I'm still of the opinion that the 2020 election was rigged.
end update ):
10/15/23: Update of last previous updated post dated 10/13/23:
Saw a headline that Dems only need 5 Republicans to elect a Democrat Speaker. This isn't likely, but you never know. The fact is, if the 5 GOP members vote for a Democrat Speaker, they may as well bolt the party altogether. Indeed, they may end up caucusing with the Democrats. The Democrats will want their own in charge. If these Republicans are still in the GOP, they are just as likely to vote against anything the Democrats want as before. The Democrats don't necessarily like any Republicans even if they DO join. Therefore, that would be the end of the the GOP's jumpers' political careers.
They might try some tactic that would allow them to stay in the party, while denying the Speakership to Jordan. There's a proposal to keep the
current temporary Speaker, who is a McCarthy ally. What could be more telling?
If it goes to the floor for a vote, there will be the same scenario as the one in January. There could be multiple votes without a Speaker being named.
On top of all that, the situation in the Middle East could be about to explode. Iran is hinting about Hezbollah, and that means they may get involved themselves. This just may be a bluff, or party of something else even bigger. People are worrying that China may move in the midst of all this chaos.
That puts pressure on the House to name a Speaker. It may well be part of the plan, too.
end update:
Update of last previous updated post dated 10/12/23:
The battle for Speaker continues.
CTH gives his analysis. I would add that Jordan has gotten more votes this time. It may no longer be about McCarthy. The fight now is about committee chairmanships and such.
end update:
Update of last previous updated post dated 10/10/23:
They are getting down to business now, as Scalise won the first vote, but they probably need a near unanimous vote to get the job done. It probably won't go down well if the Gaetz group is seen to be holding up the vote. My own opinion is that they should hold firm for SOMETHING. Otherwise the exercise will be nothing more than the usual failure theater.
Another thing is the pressures of getting the Speaker position filled. It is expected that things will happen, and there will be a need to get things done. However, the House is not completely powerless to get things done. They can hold votes without the need of a Speaker. They can do discharge petitions to get votes on items that the Speaker refuses to bring up for a vote.
Consequently, the pressure being placed to decide is not necessary. For example, if Israel needs emergency aid, the Congress can still formulate the necessary appropriation and send it on for approval. The Senate could concur or not concur and the usual conference could be held as with any other bill.
Finally, the Constitution provides for a Speaker, but does not require a formal process of one, nor for how the office is executed. The current arrangement could go on for the rest of the session if they so chose. That may not be desirable, but there's no reason why it couldn't be done. The same can be said for shut downs. All of the drama isn't necessary.
end update
Update to yesterday's post:
McCarthy won't go away. He won't run, but they'll nominate him anyway. Looks suspicious to me.
What did I tell you?
end update:
Daily Update(s):
4) 1:42 PM local: The plot thickens. The insurrection narrative again.
Will the GOP caucus split completely over Jim Jordan because he was an "insurrectionist"?
3) 12:27 local : This pretty much decides it.
McCarthy wants to come back. He's using Hamas' attack as an excuse.
2)11:39 local time: There's a reason you don't want to get rid of the motion to vacate, which was used to get rid of McCarthy. For the sake of argument, let's assume that there's a one vote majority in the House. If someone dies, who controls the House? A governor of a state could appoint a new House
member, but if the governor is of another party, you don't keep control, or you don't get control. That could leave the minority in control of
the House. Therefore, you wouldn't want that to change if you can get control and you're the minority. Or if you are the majority, but the other side won't give up the gavel. This situation could apply with narrow majorities like what we have now.
1)If they wanted to pass aid for Israel, they could do it with a discharge petition. Individual bills should be passable. There's nothing in the Constitution that forbids it. The Speaker doesn't have a vote anyway. In other words, this tactic is not only without merit, it isn't even a problem unless somebody wants it to be.
end update:
Washington Examiner:House centrist republicans want McCarthy speaker due to Israel attacks
Quote: "They believe the urgency surrounding the attacks could pressure the eight House Republicans who voted to oust McCarthy to switch their stance."
According to another
source, GOP Representative Duarte of California is quoted to have said:
Duarte alleged the vacant speakership may have played a role in Hamas' timing, particularly since the vote to oust McCarthy renders the chamber unable to approve new aid.
This is out of bounds, in my opinion. The temporary Speaker is a McCarthy ally. It is the Temporary Speaker who has delayed an immediate replacement for McCarthy. This appears to be an attempt to pressure the Republicans who voted to remove McCarthy. Indeed, if blame is to be placed, the delay should be attributed to McCarthy's ally, which means McCarthy could be orchestrating all this himself.
Those who voted McCarthy out did not want the delay. Evidently the delay is
proving useful for the
McCarthyites.
There are those in the GOP caucus who seem to be getting
wobbly. This is no time to get wobbly. They should hold the vote on Speaker soon, if not having a Speaker is the problem that Duarte and others are claiming.
