A Tactical Motion to Rid Congress of Boebert and Greene

We want to rid Congress of both Lauren Boebert and Marjorie Greene, that’s a given. But the means to achieve it appear to be beyond the current US House because of its party configuration. Democrats hold a majority that’s just a fraction over 51%, nowhere near close enough for the two-thirds required to pass a motion to expel.

It would be so much easier if a motion to keep them in Congress required two-thirds…

Enter the tactical motion.

Tactical motions are rarely used by either side – they usually go for the most straight forward route when composing a motion – though the same cannot be said for the naming of Bills. Republicans invariably give them a title which is the precise opposite of their purpose. This is a tactical move on behalf of republicans – they want to deceive voters, particularly their own voters, so the actual substance of their Bills is disguised by a deliberately misleading name.

A tactical motion has a similar function in that it appears to be counterintuitive to the mover’s intentions. Like, for example, a motion specifically designed to keep Boebert and Greene in Congress.

While doing some research for another story, I came across this in the US Constitution, Amendment XIV, Section 3.

No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any state, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any state legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any state, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof.

Seven lines and a bit is rather long for one sentence so allow me to reduce it by selecting out just the relevant words:

No person shall be a Representative in Congress who, having previously taken an oath to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof.

Both Boebert and Greene have openly sided with the insurrectionists who stormed the US Capitol on January 6. Therefore, they can both be said to have “given aid [and] comfort to the enemies thereof.” Both may well have played greater roles in the insurrection itself but the results of OCE, GAO and FBI investigations are not likely to be available for House members to use as evidence. Fortunately, the way Boebert and Greene publicly defended and sided with the perpetrators is sufficient grounds to use the 14th Amendment against them.

There is one more sentence in Amendment XIV, Section 3, which is crucial to a tactical motion strategy:

But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.

The “disability” in this instance refers to the US Constitution excluding from office anyone who has engaged in insurrection or supported insurrectionists. In the simplest terms, the Constitution dis-ables them from holding office unless this dis-ability is removed by two-thirds of their chamber saying they can hold office. Two-thirds, by the way, would be 288 votes in the present House.

Therefore, motions which encompassed the following could be drafted for both Boebert and Greene.

Rep [Lauren Boebert/Marjorie Greene] has given the insurrectionists of January 6 their public support. Therefore, under the US Constitution, Section 3, they have given aid and comfort to the public enemies who stormed the US Capitol and engaged in vandalism, theft, terrorizing staff and Members of Congress, and threatening lives.

It is further mandated by the US Constitution, Amendment XIV, Section 3, that to override the penalty prescribed – that neither shall hold office in the United States – this chamber can vote to remove the disability so that both may retain office.

I therefore move to remove from [Lauren Boebert/Marjorie Greene] the disability of her public support for insurrectionists, in order for [Lauren Boebert/Marjorie Greene] to retain elected office.

It should be noted here that the mover of a motion may vote against their own motion. Therefore a Democrat can move this motion and vote against it.

I have no doubt whatsoever that every Democrat in the House would vote against keeping Boebert and Greene and that would ensure that neither of them achieved the two-thirds majority needed for them to keep their seats.

That is the essence of a tactical motion. The point is not to win, but to lose.

Boebert and Greene may be the first ones to spring to mind when it comes to ridding Congress of dangerous undesirables but they’re not the only ones who deserve to lose their seats. Both the House and Senate have a number of members for whom a case may be made under the 14th Amendment for their removal.

In addition, several agencies have together launched hundreds of investigations into the January 6 insurrection. Both the FBI and DoJ are on record saying that this is the largest operation in their histories, and a continual rollout of multiple indictments and trials can be expected throughout the year.

Republican reps and senators who are found to be involved, will not escape justice. But Democratic Members of the House are understandably anxious to quickly rid their chamber of those who threaten their safety, whether via verbal slander and threats or the physical intimidation and menace of bringing guns onto the House floor.

We know a motion to expel is fated to fail and a censure motion can only deprive them of committee assignments. But losing a tactical motion to keep Boebert and Greene in elected office… well that might just succeed.