U.S. House adjourns without a speaker after GOP leader Kevin McCarthy falls short in three votes
PUBLISHED TUE, JAN 3 202310:06 AM ESTUPDATED TUE, JAN 3 2023AT 6:17 EST

House GOP Leader Kevin McCarthy appears to lack support to become speaker

WASHINGTON — The U.S. House of Representatives adjourned for the day Tuesday without a speaker, after Republican leader Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., failed in three consecutive votes to secure enough support to be elected to the post.

The failed votes marked the first time in 100 years that the majority party in the House has not elected a speaker on its first vote. The staunch opposition to McCarthy from a core group of Republicans grew larger over the course of the day, throwing the party into chaos.

Democrats, meanwhile, appeared to enjoy the spectacle of their opponents so deeply divided.

During each of the three voice votes, every Democrat on the floor rallied unanimously around incoming Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y. But a sect of conservative Republicans split from their party to back other candidates, including longtime McCarthy ally Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio.

In an unexpected twist, McCarthy actually lost support as the voting continued, when in the third round Florida Republican Rep. Byron Donalds announced his support for Jordan, after having voted twice for McCarthy.

As a result of Donalds’ defection, McCarthy won 202 of the 218 votes needed to secure the post in the third round, one vote less than he had in the first two ballots.

Jordan, who nominated and voted for McCarthy, won 20 votes in the third round. Jeffries, the incoming Democratic minority leader, won 212 votes in each of the three rounds.

Following the vote, Donalds suggested his caucus take a break from voting.

“The reality is Rep. Kevin McCarthy doesn’t have the votes,” Donalds wrote on Twitter. “I committed my support to him publicly and for two votes on the House Floor. 218 is the number, and currently, no one is there.

“Our conference needs to recess and huddle and find someone or work out the next steps, but these continuous votes aren’t working for anyone,” Donalds wrote. “When the dust settles, we will have a Republican Speaker, now is the time for our conference to debate and come to a consensus.”

McCarthy’s failure to win public support from his entire caucus has cast a shadow over the new Republican majority, exposing divisions within the party that have existed for decades. The differences were deepened by former President Donald Trump, who emboldened a small band of ultra-conservatives.

Trump eventually backed McCarthy’s bid for speaker, as did other influential conservatives such as Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga. But the ex-president’s sway within the GOP caucus did not prevent McCarthy’s repeated defeat.

Following the failed votes Tuesday, Trump pointedly declined to endorse McCarthy with as much gusto as he has previous.

“We’ll see what happens,” Trump told NBC News, when asked directly if he was sticking with the GOP leader. “I got everybody calling me wanting my support. But let’s see what happens.”

The mood on the House floor Tuesday started out cheerful and energetic, due in part to the presence of members’ children and family members, many of whom came to witness what they expected would be swearing in ceremonies.

But it grew more tense as the day wore on. Until a speaker is elected, the rest of the chamber’s members-elect cannot be sworn in, because their oath of office is administered by the speaker.

While the House held multiple rounds of voting, the Senate, which is again controlled by Democrats, swore in Washington Sen. Patty Murray as the Senate president pro tempore, making her the first woman in American history to hold the position.

While the vice president is technically the president of the Senate, the president pro tem presides over the chamber on a daily basis, signing legislation and administering oaths of office.

The Senate pro tem is also typically third in line for the presidency, after the vice president and the Speaker of the House.

But on Tuesday night, with no speaker elected in the House yet, Murray temporarily became second in line.


Early in the day, McCarthy had vowed to continue holding votes as long as it took to win 218, effectively trying to call his opponents’ bluff.

But after the third vote, both Democrats and Republicans grew visibly anxious to leave their seats. Unlike most votes, where members can vote in absentia, the speaker vote must be conducted in person, leaving no room for members to come and go.

With no immediate solution to the Republican impasse on the horizon, the House held a voice vote on a motion to adjourn that was loudly endorsed by both parties.

McCarthy’s conservative opponents still have a long list of demands they believe McCarthy has failed to meet.


https://www.cnbc.com/2023/01/03/hou...kevin-mccarthy-looks-to-win-support.html

Apparently, The Speaker does not have to actually be a member of the House of Representatives.

1, Weird

2, Would love to see them make Liz Chaney the Speaker.
- will never happen
- would she even accept?

A truly funny event took place yesterday.. George Santos, the Lying Rep, put up on his house Social Media site that he was sworn in my the Speaker of the house.. But there was no speaker of the house. That post was taken down later.

This guy will continue to lie no matter what. If the Republicans allow him to remain, they are saying it's ok to lie.

LOL,, now that right there is rather funny., Liz Cheney as Speaker of the House? Oh man, the so called Freedom caucus would flip out. You know what might be worse is Hakeem Jefferies being voted in as Speaker. He already has more votes that Kevin McCarthy. 212 to 203 or there abouts.

Talk about the Freedom Caucus heads exploding.. Yikes.

I don't think you could get enough republicans to vote for a Democrat for speaker. Not sure you could even get 1. The only way Jeffries could be voted in would be if enough republicans would not show up thusly lowering the vote threshold to below the number of democrats

I do believe Cheney could get enough support from Republicans that they could find enough Democrats to put her over the top

Well, since Cheney is out of Congress now, I'd say that's highly unlikely.

No doubt it would take a number of Dems to put her over the top... Not sure how it breaks down.

Hakeem Jefferies got 212 votes, if Cheney can get those she only needs 6 republican votes.. She could get that. Personally, I think it's highly unlikely but it is possible.

That she isn't a member of congress is no barrier to her becoming speaker. I would think she would need to agree to accept it if the votes are there.. I don't think the votes are there.. But I do believe it would be closer that any of us suspect...Cheney has shown she can work with Dems,, that will garner her many votes I would think.. But like you, I think it's highly unlikely!

It appears many of those who voted against McCarthy are from the Cra Cra Caucus...

Rep. Andy Biggs
Rep. Dan Bishop
Rep. Lauren Boebert
Rep. Josh Brecheen
Rep. Michael Cloud
Rep. Andrew Clyde
Rep. Eli Crane
Rep. Matt Gaetz
Rep. Bob Good
Rep. Paul Gosar
Rep. Andy Harris
Rep. Anna Paulina Luna
Rep. Mary Miller
Rep. Ralph Norman
Rep. Andy Ogles
Rep. Scott Perry
Rep. Matt Rosendale
Rep. Chip Roy
Rep. Keith Self
Rep. Byron Donalds

Cheney would never get 212 dem votes. But I could see 100 or even 150

We had fun with the notion of Cheney., But moving on...
If not McCarthy then who?

Scalise? Doubtful
Jim Jordan? God help us
McHenry? Seems like he doesn't want it.

It's quite a conundrum. The extremists won't support anyone who doesn't give in to their extremist demands. The traditional Republicans seem unwilling to give in to the extremists. We'll see how much power means over principals by who wins out in all of this.

LOL,, Yeah the Chaney thing is fun,, but silly.. Won't happen!

Someone on TV threw out Trumps name...God help us......NO.

Watching the count right now, it appears that McCarthy has lost for the fifth time,,,,,,

I would think there isn't one that would fit all the needs of the congressmen that Pit listed.. It's just crazy but this is the problem with the freedom congress. They aren't thinking of America.

You know how much Republicans support new elections after they lose them. The idea of a do over seems to excite them. This time it's an over and over and over and over.

Liz Cheney is a democratic wet dream.

More realistic options.

1. McCarthy gives away the store to become speaker, and we see nothing but Biden investigations/impeachments. Payback.

2. The Far right Republicans come up with another leader, and we see nothing but Biden investigations/impeachments. Payback

3. The Moderate Republicans come up with another leader, who is palatable to Democrats that wont do investigations/impeachments. The Far Right screams Compromise.

Democrats are holding out for someone that wont promise investigations to satisfy the far right.

I have disdain for those on the far right and far left. They are the problem.

What do you consider far left?

The squad and others of that ilk. Bernie too...

Yeah, they aren't far left; they are progressive. If you ask me, progressives are the only group ready and capable of leading. What they aren't is some cult, like MAGA. This isn't the 80s or 90s, and the days of the centrist corporatist government of the early 2000s are all but dead. No need to fill your side of the aisle with compromises when the other side has lost its mind.

They should just nominate Santos and get it over with.

j/c

I predict that Kevin McCarthy will eventually get the votes he needs to take the gavel.

I also predict that he will have sold off enough parts of himself to attain said seat... that said seat will be powerless - or worse.
Said seat could actually be for sale/lease/use to the strongest-voiced sub-caucus on any given day, and eternally subject to temporary intra-party wind shifts.

That is no 'leadership position' at all.

Oh, he might assume the role, play around with the hammer in front of C-SPAN cameras, and preside over ceremonial/procedural junk, but he will never, ever be able to whip his entire party into lockstep, like Mistress Nanceboot Von DonkDom© (whipcraaaaaaaackck!!!)

For twenty years.

And when all's said and done, that badass whippin' power is exactly what is wanted/needed/expected in a House Speaker.
A person who can herd cats into cattle... and get them all into the chute. On time.

Based upon what we've seen so far, does anyone really think that Kevin McCarthy can actually accomplish this even once, during the next 2 years?
Because as tight as house numbers are during this upcoming term, a great many bill actions are gonna require a great many whipping sessions.

Something tells me that only a scant few congressfolk are gonna respond to Mistress Kevin: Kitten with a Whip.


I'm just leaving this out here for public consideration: KMcC has groveled, genuflected, and 'buns-up beta male-d' his way to within an inch of the brass ring.
If he finally greases his way into contact, he will find the ring too slippery to actually wield with any effectiveness? He will have zero ideological influence, zero policy-making influence, zero voice in the party's direction. He will be compromised/neutered by every faction to whom he now owes a portion of his flesh and future.

I don't care what side of Red/Blue politics anyone leans to, the politics-interested citizen in me sees this particular guy as compromised beyond all effectiveness.
Yay, Democracy.


It will be interesting to see what this generation of the House produces, if anything.


.02

Honestly, McCarthy couldn't whip a dead mouse.

He can't read his own caucus. Love her or hate her, Pelosi was amazing at rounding up the troops and herding them to go her way.

j/c:

At least we know that Republicans don't just fall in line like Democrats do whether you agree or disagree with party. I respect those that are in opposition. I do feel they will eventually lose when there is 200 vs 20 in this case. But no one should be forced to just fall in party line.

wow

Good question, who......as a former Republican- I'm laughing at the whole party, you wanted a lying, non-conformist President who would clean up the swamp.....what did you reap- a splintered party which the Democrats are laughing at....remember that promised red wave, inflation, open borders, the economy- they, the know it alls, the wave was coming. Dumb, they forgot about all the lying Trump brought, the anguish Roe vs Wade caused, and Democrats working all those slights.....independents like me stopped the red wave and until the Republicans get more central and work WITH Democrats to get something done they will be LOSERS...JMHO.

Love Cheney, she'd be great President.

You're right. They should be able to blackmail McCarhty into giving them whatever they want and hold their party hostage rather than do what's best for their own party.

I know, right?

I think you pretty much nailed the most likely scenarios and options left on the table. If I had to pick a front runner I would say he gives the Cra Cra Caucus everything they want to become speaker. Then in fact his role won't actually be what the speaker role should be. He'll be a puppet and not Speaker of the House.

Goper’s … what an embarrassment. Bet they’d make a quick decision if the rules were limited to eight votes. Who ever has the most votes is speaker.

I considered the very though of that as crazy and that nobody would vote for trump to be Speaker of the House. And then one of the Cra Cra Conference did this.....

Gaetz votes for Trump for Speaker on 7th ballot

Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.) voted for former President Trump for Speaker of the House on Thursday, as the chamber held its seventh vote in three days in an attempt to elect a Speaker.

Gaetz, who has been a staunch opponent of Rep. Kevin McCarthy’s (R-Calif.) bid for Speaker, broke with his fellow anti-McCarthy members to vote for Trump on the seventh ballot. The remaining 19 representatives voted for Rep. Byron Donalds (R-Fla.).

Gaetz later tweeted out a photo illustration of Trump brandishing the Speaker’s gavel.

Although no movement occurred in the seventh vote — as the same 20 far-right members continued to split with the rest of the Republican Party — several members appeared to be making progress in negotiations with McCarthy overnight. Gaetz, however, seemed to dig in on his anti-McCarthy position.

The move comes after Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-Colo.), a member of the anti-McCarthy group, suggested on Wednesday night that she might nominate Trump for the position. The comment earned Boebert a barbed response from Fox News host Sean Hannity.

“Is this a game show? Like we’re gonna pick [Rep.] Jim Jordan [R-Ohio] one day, Trump the other day?” Hannity asked Boebert.

Despite the apparent support from Gaetz and Boebert, Trump himself has backed McCarthy’s bid for Speaker and urged Republican lawmakers to “get this thing over with.”

“I think it is a dangerous game, and, frankly, if they are not happy with him, they can do something about it at a later date,” Trump told Fox News Digital of the anti-McCarthy group.

https://thehill.com/homenews/house/...PQaOnft87gNbho9bSoREC-kQfuplOV0cPzUnYLUc

If anyone wonders why I call this bunch the Cra Cra Caucus this should answer that question for them.

Exactly! unless and until republicans and democrats learn to live and work together, this country is going nowhere fast.

McCarthy Destroys His Speakership In Order to Save It

If they accept the terms McCarthy is offering his opponents, House Republicans would essentially be codifying desperation for the indefinite future.

In desperate circumstances, Kevin McCarthy worked overnight Wednesday on a desperation deal.

If that deal is somehow successful, based on the work-in-progress details that came to light Thursday morning, House Republicans will essentially be codifying desperation for the indefinite future — making disorder and factional appeasement a formal part of their governing creed.

The bargain under discussion, as described by my colleague Rachael Bade, would give McCarthy the speakership in exchange for a new batch of concessions that would further dilute his ability to exert actual authority in the job. Since he hasn’t articulated and may not have strong views about a governing agenda, beyond Biden administration investigations, one could arguably see why McCarthy might be willing to give it a try to win a position he has coveted for years.

The mystery is why other Republicans — his own allies in particular — would go along with this.

Even before the latest round of overnight negotiating, McCarthy was at risk of violating principles of power that are at work in any arena where people jostle for influence and recognition — from school playgrounds to world capitals. McCarthy has served notice that there is more advantage to be gained by being his enemy than his ally.

The reports on the latest maneuvering put that in a vivid light. POLITICO’s story described the bargaining as a “glimmer of hope” for McCarthy. The details, however, are hopeful in the same way that a person dying of thirst might find a pitcher of saltwater hopeful.

McCarthy is ready to drink.

Previously, he had agreed to House rules that would allow five members to push a “motion to vacate” forcing a vote on whether to oust the speaker. Going any lower than that was supposedly a “red line.” Now, a new deal would allow just one person to force a new showdown and McCarthy advocates say there is not really a practical difference between one and five.

Red line? What we meant to say was actually, you know, not so much red as kind of magenta. Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick (R-Pa.), a McCarthy supporter, said as he left the would-be speaker’s office Thursday morning that the latest moves should not be thought of as “concessions” but rather “clarifications.” He said he’s confident his fellow GOP partisans won’t “misuse” the motion to vacate.

Members of the Freedom Caucus, with which McCarthy opponents closely align, would also get a guaranteed two spots on the powerful House Rules Committee — amid signs that McCarthy might surrender the speaker’s historical power to decide which individuals get the seats.

Opponents are also using their leverage to extract major changes in the appropriations process. There would be standalone votes on each 12 annual appropriations bills — a major priority for fiscal conservatives who deplore big “omnibus” spending packages — considered under an “open rule” that allows any lawmaker to offer floor amendments.

Notably, according to Bade’s reporting in POLITICO Playbook, “McCarthy’s camp also expects that he may eventually have to endorse [his opponent’s preferred choices] 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.”

If you are someone other than Harris or Green and had been hoping someday to wield that gavel, and have been a steadfast McCarthy supporter, how do you feel about that preceding sentence? As a practical matter, McCarthy is asking his own supporters to be as supine toward him as he is being to his opponents.

McCarthy may feel he has no choice, but what’s striking about the modern House is that there are many others who also feel that their range of options is so narrow. An earlier generation of lawmakers would have had multiple other powerful actors — veteran committee chairs and appropriators and the like — with independent bases of power. There is scant prospect that they would have been fine with letting a weakened figure take the speakership or simply leave it to McCarthy to decide for himself how long he wants to let this week’s drama drag on.

There were some signs of a backlash. The Dispatch reported that Rep. Robert Alderholt, a veteran GOP appropriator from Alabama and McCarthy backer, is bridling at the latest reports. Adding some people to committees, is one thing, but “as far as skipping over people’s seniority ... I think we’ve gone too far.”

Also notable is the nature of McCarthy’s defense. Just as he chose not to have Republicans campaign last fall on an idea platform — such as Newt Gingrich’s “Contract for America” in 1994 — he has not really waged battle with his opponents on the ideas front. He has urged them to get in line for the sake of party unity, and on grounds that Republicans should be firing at President Joe Biden rather than each other.

But he so far hasn’t ventured a substantive argument like: My values and judgment about governing are better, and more in line with the country’s mood and the mainstream of the GOP, than those of my grandstanding opponents like Matt Gaetz or Lauren Boebert.

He might reasonably ask: How on earth would that help anything? One answer is that it would at least claim a higher ground for his candidacy than what he has tried so far — transactional maneuvering, now turning to rank appeasement. That’s especially true since the latter approach hasn’t worked so far, and — with multiple opponents saying they are hard no’s no matter what McCarthy puts forward — there is only the slightest reason to suppose it will start working.

For now, McCarthy has maneuvered himself into a situation where he might face something worse than losing the speakership: Winning it under conditions like these.

https://www.politico.com/news/magaz...EJU7n4-eDOsM6j9z_PIO931e5IKqCWAAJyawcOi8

Obviously the overnight negotiations were not enough. Let's just see how much more power he is willing to hand over the the Cra Cra Caucus to hold the Speakership. As if it would actually be the Speakership at all. As of now it's looking like it can't be.

McCarthy: "Spino."
(Speaker In Name Only)

That is clever and funny
Unfortunately, he sabotaged his bid for speaker by being spino-less these past 2 years

As minority leader, what real power did he possess? Not much. I don't care for him because during the Jan 6 incident, he publicly pleaded with Trump to do something to call it off.. After, he went to Mar A Lago to Kiss Trumps Butt.

He's weak and wishy washy at best. But at the same time, all but 21 of his people voted for him. Most importantly, the ones that didn't are part of the Freedom Caucus and are holding America Hostage.

Here's a thought, what about electing Mike Pence as speaker?

I don't know if anyone else saw this, but Matt Gaitz says that if McCarthy is elected speaker, he'll resign.. Wondering, is that a threat or a promise...

Any bets on how many rounds of voting before Hakeem is elected speaker?

17

That would be funny., But I don't think that will happen. What can happen is that if a group of 6 Republicans say, if you don't Elect McCarthy to be the speaker, we're going to throw our votes to Jefferies. I would see that as a possibility. A VERY DISTANT ONE....

Can you imagine, a republican held house with a Democrat speaker.... OK, admit it, that would be different. LOL

Kevin McCarthy needs to pack it in. What doesn't he understand? Step down and get out of the way. These bastards couldn't tell you what color the sky was.

You mean the 20 bastards that wish to insure our government can't function? I'm not a fan of Kevin McCarthy. I can however understand how over 200 members of congress do not wish to allow 20 members to hold the party hostage and blackmail them.

There are plenty of Democrats who could cross over or Republicans who can too.

How many Republican votes did Pelosi get for speaker? When your opponents are kicking their own ass don't expect your opposition to bail you out.

And yes, there are Republicans that could cross over to vote for McCarthy. Those are the exact people holding the Republican party for ransom. But it's starting to appear that McCarthy is selling enough of his soul to at least begin to win some of them over.

I wish he would sell out and get some Democratic support.

Of course but you’ll never see a group of democrats smiling and laughing about how they shut down a working government for a week or two just because they could. It’s an embarrassment to their own party.

2013 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2013_United_States_federal_government_shutdown

2018/2019 (several times) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2018%E2%80%932019_United_States_federal_government_shutdown

yep… yet another republican led house that failed to govern.

They finally got it done.

Just a comment.

I have seen many on here over the past years wanting a viable 3rd party.

This is a good example of what it would be like with a solid 3rd party. Here it took 20 hold outs to bodger up the works. This could just as easily happen with the Dems and their left wing the party. A part of the Dem party I am sure who have been taking notes to use the next time they are in power for a similar vote.

I missed it, was there some kinda physical fight that almost broke out on the house floor last night... Someone needed restrained or something like that. What did I miss.

Anyway, McCarthy made it as Speaker.. Wonder what he had to give up and promise.

We already know he sold his soul to donny during his visit to Mar A Lardo.

Nobody had to "take notes". It's always taken a majority of the House to elect a speaker. And while a third party is a wonderful idea can you imagine how difficult it would be to get a majority of the House to vote in a majority for a Speaker if the vote was split three ways?

j/c

The Cra Cra Caucus won. If anyone has any doubts about this, Gaetz said it all with this.

Matt Gaetz Says He 'Ran Out of Stuff to Ask For' From McCarthy

"I am excited and encouraged," Gaetz said. "I am grateful that Speaker-designate McCarthy has been so receptive to each and every change that we have demanded. And Sean, we're at the stage right now where I'm running out of stuff to ask for."

https://www.newsweek.com/matt-gaetz-says-he-ran-out-stuff-ask-mccarthy-1772024

Lol Once again projecting Goper flaws on the opposition. It never fails to show up.

I understand that. My point is a group like the squad might decide to do something similar to push more of their viewpoint.

Both party's seem to have a small but vocal group more on the fringe than the mainstream group inside the party.

To Perfects point, I don't see it as a flaw so much as simply politics in the roaring 20's. I wasn't trying to say anything as a diss to the Dems in this regard.

It makes sense to me when subgroups flex their muscle when they have the chance,. I don't like it all that much, but I get why it was or can again be done.

Oh I certainly didn't take it as you trying to diss the Democrats. I however do not believe you thought it through. It has been known all along that to obstruct someone from becoming Speaker all you have to do is have a very small contingent within your own party to prevent it and use leverage to your advantage. I don't think anyone had to take notes to understand that or as if it were some new, magical idea.

Both parties do certainly have what I call the whackamole fringe elements within their ranks. But this is the first time in over 160 years that such a thing has been done. While each of the extreme contingents of both parties have known this could be done all along only one side has tried and successfully used it to their advantage since pre Civil war times. Could the other side do the same? Certainly. But then they could have done so all along and chose not to. This isn't a new idea. Yet it has been since before the Civil war that it has gone this far.

and the fact is a lot of people can do a lot of things that are technically legal. That doesn't make them any more right. Do I understand people pushing those boundaries? Not from a realistic standpoint. I realize at that point they have chosen to do the wrong thing for their own personal gain while ignoring what they know is the right thing to do.

And as I said previously, under the current rules to elect a Speaker, a third party in the mix would make it impossible to achieve. I like the idea of a third party but a lot of rules would have to be changed for any functioning government to come from it.

Who would be the third party... Insurrectionists? Maybe Trump a Doodle Do's or how about the Domestic Terror Party. Trump, Gaitz, Boebert, Gosar, McCarthy would be Charter Members.. My guess is that the Army of this party would be some combination of the Proud Boys or Oath Keepers or KKK or some other white/christian Nationalist folks.. There motto would be, Go armed or don't go at all.....,.

You say this could have happened with the Dems,, But it didn't. So trying to lay out some BS like this won't make it real. As for Dems taking notes, why? Just look across the isle to see why it's dangerous and stupid.

It would be moderates. A group which feel, and understandably so, that neither of the two major parties represent them. The insurrectionists have already pledged their loyalty to a major political party.

Mike Rogers had to be restrained around the head from going after Gaetz. They should have let him go

Here is some from CNN that was given up


McCarthy picks up key support amid concessions
In a major shift, McCarthy and his allies successfully flipped more than a dozen GOP votes into his column Friday afternoon – the first sign of serious momentum in support of his speaker bid after a series of failed votes over the course of multiple days.

Here is a list of key concessions and promises McCarthy and his allies have made over the course of the negotiations, based on CNN reporting:

-Any member can call for a motion to vacate the speaker’s chair – this is significant because it would make it much easier than it is currently to trigger what is effectively a no confidence vote in the speaker. Conservatives pushed hard for this, while moderates are worried it will weaken McCarthy’s hand.
-A McCarthy-aligned super PAC agreed to not play in open Republican primaries in safe seats
-The House will hold votes on key conservative bills, including a balanced budget amendment, congressional term limits and border security
-Efforts to raise the nation’s debt ceiling must be paired with spending cuts. This could become a major issue in the future when it is time to raise the debt limit to avoid a catastrophic default because Democrats in the Senate and the White House would likely oppose demands for spending cuts
-Move 12 appropriations bills individually. Instead of passing separate bills to fund government operations, Congress frequently passes a massive year-end spending package known as an “omnibus” that rolls everything into one bill. Conservatives rail against this, arguing that it evades oversight and allows lawmakers to stick in extraneous pet projects.
-More Freedom Caucus representation on committees, including the powerful House Rules Committee
-Cap discretionary spending at fiscal 2022 levels, which would amount to lower levels for defense and domestic programs
Seventy-two hours to review bills before they come to floor
-Give members the ability to offer more amendments on the House floor
-Create an investigative committee to probe the “weaponization” of the federal government
-Restore the Holman rule, which can be used to reduce the salary of government officials

One that stands out to me is the debt ceiling-they have already said that they will not raise the debt ceiling without very large cuts to social security and medicare.

The other one that stands out is the rescinding the holman rule-they can vote to rescind federal employees salaries and reduce the appropriations to agencies. They could reduce the appropriations down to 1 dollar. It has been assumed that they would try this with the DOJ and the FBI.

Sacrifices:

1. His authority
2. His influence
3. His spinal column
4. His scrotal sac.

Promises:

1. Anything "The 20" demand, for the next 2 years.

Kevin McCarthy: eunuch with a gavel.
Strong leadership you can respect! [/purple]

Matt Gaetz Says He 'Ran Out of Stuff to Ask For' From McCarthy

"Create an investigative committee to probe the “weaponization” of the federal government"
Do they really think this? Is this a QAnon demand someone got in. This is bonkers. what a waste of time money and energy. I guess MTG will get this one.

Yeah, I saw that too.

Kevin has now passed through the Gaetz of Hell.
His soul is no longer his own.

Ready yourself: you're about to see 2 years of the dog being wagged by his tail.

We'll see.

I don't think it is in as much disarray as some think.

In looking at some of the demands, I like many them and don't care one way or the other about the others.

I don't think that we know a lot of what was demanded and given.

I am 100% in agreement with the demand for a 72 hour window between Bill submission for a vote and the actual vote. I never understood how you could vote for a Bill you haven't read.

Many of the demands are being overblown such as the vote for npw confidence in the Speaker. This is really just a return to the pre-Pelosi era. Though with the state of politics today, this is ripe for abuse.

My bigger concerns are what we have yet to see. Committee memberships and chairmanships will be something to keep an eye on. This will have a huge impact on the nation going forward.

Also, it seems as if there may have been demands for a number of investigations. I find it funny that the Republicans criticize the Dems for doing what they call "frivolous" investigations yet want to start twice as many "frivolous" investigations.

First order of business…..make title 42 permanent. Scrutinize Hunter Biden’s laptop and personal emails. Impeachment of Biden. Cut support to Ukraine. Meetings with Lil Kim. Mark it down.

Not that it matters really, but I was just being Snarkey towards Peen....:)

Your right, there isn't as much disarray as some might think... Its worse.... I mean when you have to restrain members from beating the hell out of another member, you've crossed the line from disarray to chaos.

Can you imagine a couple guys beating the hell out of each other over Nancy? Oops never mind …more chaos on the right.

That's the thing about these "demands". Most of them could be used in a good way. But the way they are written they can also be used in a destructive manner. To do nothing but cause chaos and deceit. As you said, we'll see.

I don't know if it is twice as many, or even frivolous, but the Dems have been in constant investigations, so what goes around, come around as the saying goes.
I do wish we could get out of that mode, but lot's of luck with that, at least this go round.

As I said, I like some, and don't care about the others. I agree, to simply pass a bill unseen is irresponsible. The American public deserves to know how and where their tax money is being spent. I don't care which party you want to point to, both include all sorts of crap that has nothing to do with the intent or name placed on the bill.

I get some pork, just the way it is, but we are at a point it is just plain fraud with some of the attached crap.

You mean January 6th? Where over 140 police officers were injured and the certification of the election was interrupted? Yeah, no reason to investigate that. Are you serious here?

I was thinking more along the lines of tax returns, election fraud, russian collusion, unreturned documents...things that....and in a ironic way I suppose the lack of investigation of other things, but now they will get a deep dive look.

For clarification.

Twice as many was used as a colloquialism not intended to be completely accurate.

Frivolous was used because that is how the republicans are referring to Jan 6 and mar-a-lago. I don't think either of those frivolous.
As for the other side, I don't think Hunter Biden did anything illegal by himself. The question becomes, did Joe Biden do anything to make it illegal? I don't know so I don't think that would be a frivolous investigation, even if it comes out to be nothing. My issue with this one is Gym Jordan et al turing it into a circus with no substance behind it.

I do feel that MTG's desire to investigate whether we are unfairly prosecuting Jan 6th insurrectionists as not only frivolous but offensive.

I wouldn't consider any of those investigations frivolous.
Whether those investigation result in proving an illegality or not is irrelevant.
Those investigation need to be done.

You mean actual crimes for the most part? I think you must have missed who is making wild claims of election fraud. And you do understand that keeping top secret documents is a felony offense, right? I know it does offend people such as yourself that expecting a president to release his tax returns the same way every president has done for 50 years seems outrageous and it seems that you have no issue with him and his assertions that he couldn't because he was under audit has proven to be a lie. The things people find outrageous and the things they dismiss at the very same time I find to be somewhat confusing.

You do realize he plainly stated that if he wasn't under audit he would release them, right? No problem for you I guess.

Dishonesty doesn't seem to be such an issue for some and they seem to think almost everything else is more important.

That was hilarious! Thanks.

I really wish McCarthy would have negotiated with more center leaning Democrats than these 20 people.

It would have been better for Americans and negotiations to get things done with Dems.

Dissapointing!

I assume the investigations you speak of are things like Jan 6, Georgia election tampering, Fraud in NY, Stealing secure documents? Or trying to extort fake favors the President of the Ukraine? Stuff like that? If so, tell me what's wrong with those investigations or at least tell me the Right wouldn't investigate any member of the Left for the same actions...

Or, if you want, you can tell me what the Left has done that requires investigated. I don't have a list.

That is the difference by the way., Those on the Right, like Trump and Rudy and Stone and Bannon have given the Left plenty of stuff to investigate. The actions of guys like McCarthy or Biggs or Gosar or Boebart or Green and maybe Jim Jordan regarding Jan 6 have contributed to the many issues. I mean, Jordan asked trump for a Pardon before he left office. I think it was Biggs or Perry that did the same. And now we have the wife of a SCOTUS justice openly saying the election was a fraud and again, NOT ONE STICK OF PROOF.



But yes, by all means, let's go after the Presidents son... (just so you know, if they go after Hunter Biden and find him guilty of something, I'm all for making him pay, Nobody is above the law....NOBODY)

This was probably more intelligent banter than what was actually said. Lowest common denominator Congress folk.

I keep prying for centerist/moderate Dems and Republicans to work together... it'd be much better for America if we had more collaboration and less of the fringe on either side...

I like to think that there is more of that than being reported. That just doesn't make for "good" news. How long is news about Republican and Democratic Senators working together to get bill through the process going to keep people riveted to their televisions?

"And in Washington, everybody got along".

That sounds a lot like Wishful Thinking.. I wish it were true also. Neither side has all the answers and in that case, the real losers are the American People who count on their elected officials to work FOR them not a party.

trump and the republicans were always, always "us against the dems." Biden has gone out of his way to get and mention bi-partisan support every chance he gets. trump thrived on division.

Loving how McCarthy is graciously taking his seat. To an audience of one. Lol

I think you may have missed my point. It's probably because I took shortcuts to make the spelling pun in my punch line ("Gaetz" of Hell...)


Here's my point behind the post:

Kevin McCarthy relinquished pretty much every lever of influence that comes with the post of SOtH in order to actually gain the title. Every single concession he made gave power/influence to the 20 holdouts, while the other 200 Republicans who held the line in support stood by and watched him do it. Each of those concessions took from him another % of the very thing he's lusted after for so many decades. The far-right wing of the GOP now owns him for the next 2 years.

He will dance upon their strings, allow them to dictate what gets sent to the floor, rubber-stamp them spending time/money on investigations, and become the king of passing nothing that actually helps American families. With a Dem-held Senate and a Dem POTUS armed with his veto pen, what influence do you really think Kevin McCarthy actually wields? For that matter, what influence do you think the Matt Gaetz/Lauren Boebert wing(nutz) of the GOP will have over how real s# rolls down, these next 24 months?

Bruh- these past 5 days are just the beginning.
They are the GOP under the magnifying glass. Close-up ain't lookin' so pretty, yo.

Expect so, so much more of this... because the GOP is just beginning to work themselves through some deepazz family dynamics, right now.

It happens with both parties on a reg basis.
Right now, it's the GOP in the public crosshairs.

Matt Gaetz is the current face of Kevin McCarthy's worst nightmare: a House member with his same R badge, who's publicly bent him over in more humiliating ways than any D ever could/would. Matt G is a mini-Trump... and Kevin has now shown everyone that he'll even play The Ned Beatty Role for a cheapass Trump knock-off.

Not the most auspicious start to a new Speaker's tenure.
I've already made my predix: Kevin McCarthy will preside over the 118th congress with a void between his legs.



I don't care about the specific "demands" you'd rather discuss, or even the ones you agree/disagree with. I'd much rather discuss the more important and salient issue: the manner in which Kevin McCarthy routinely and repeatedly sold off every single scrap of his dignity/soul to get that thing he's so nakedly lusted after for so many years. I'd much rather discuss what that means for the GOP, the legislative branch, and us American citizens going forward- with such a compromised, neutered, invertebrate person filling such a central governmental role.


As I said: Kevin McCarthy has truly passed through "The Gaetz of Hell."
He now has what he's always wanted: the Title. Only.

-and there's no going back.

Just like throwing trump at us in spite of Obama. They’re throwing McCarthy at us in spite of Nancy. Childish games. Goper’s Pffft.

You warned them about what trump really was. They didn't listen. You told them trump was a habitual liar and a grifter. They did not listen. You are now warning them of what happened right in front of their very noses and they still won't listen.

It reminds me of part of the lyrics to a song I really like by Don McLean titled Vincent. At first he thinks people will listen. After a while he realizes hey will most likely never listen.....

Now, I understand what you tried to say to me
And how you suffered for your sanity
And how you tried to set them free
They would not listen, they did not know how
Perhaps they'll listen now

Last chorus

Now, I think I know what you tried to say to me
How you suffered for your sanity
How you tried to set them free
They would not listen, they're not listening still
Perhaps they never will

Yep. The right literally handed the house over to an inept bootlicking fool. Hopefully, the left can limit the damage these idiots do every time they get a say in anything. There is light at the end of the tunnel, though; AI and VR advancements are such that we should be able to create a looney toons-like world where Marge, Beavis, Stinkerbelle Bobert, and look-the-other-way Gym Jordan can call all the shots. Y'all can spend eternity holding each other's beer in complete bliss with no libs in VR. Meanwhile, the real world can get back to the business of growing economies and governing like adults.

"Starry, starry night...."

Yep. I know the piece.

I need help understanding something.


The house is telling us that they intend to cut funding to the IRS and the FBI. Can they actually do that without senate approval....

I understand they can bring impeachment charges against a few of the folks they don't like. Such as Mayorkas (sp) and Biden. But without the senate, what does it mean? The house impeached Trump only to have the Senate reject it. so I'm a little confused what all the fuss is about.

Yes. The house controls funding. If it doesn't pass there, no funding is appropriated.

Impeachments are different. The House brings impeachment charges but the actual trial is conducted in the Senate.

I guess that's the way they'll go about attempting to control the Budget,, Simply don't approve anything in the house.

OK,, so, if the house approves a budget, can the senate say no and send it back to them?

Man if t hat's the case, it's going to be fun to watch the next two years.

Thankful that other countries are stepping up with Ukraine. Like US selling weapons to Canada for them to give to the Ukraine.

It’s obstruction plan and simple. Back to the same ole game. Protecting the rich and the tax they don’t pay. Impeachment, and protecting insurrectionists. While inflation, crime, and, border security are seated up in the bleachers. You know the issues they ran on.

Not quite like that.

LOL...I suppose if you don't like something, I am all for it. I am sure it works the other way as well.

Whatever.

FWIW, remember the old saying, if it walks like a duck, it's a duck.