One thing you know for sure, whenever Kreepy Kevin McCarthy and Sugar Daddy Matt Gaetz get together to horse trade, nothing is on the up and up. Hell, these guys played two of the weasels in Who Framed Roger Rabbit.
I couldn’t figure out how in the hell McCarthy’s Rules package got through so easily, after all the grousing. I know why now. Punchbowl News was the first to break the fact that if the rules package that was voted on today looked awfully like the one from two weeks ago, It was! There was only one minor change to the document.
That’s because being the sneaky weasel he is, McCarthy put all of the filthy, degrading backroom dealing and committee seat selling into a secret addendum. None of that toxic shit actually appeared in the text, where it could piss people off. And here’s the cherry. Not everybody had access to a copy with the addendum.
And of course, that one minor change that appeared in the broad text was the now infamous update to the Motion to vacate the Chair. In the new rule, a single member of either party can bring a motion to the floor for a vote to vacate the Speaker’s chair, and elect a new Chairman.
This is actually nothing new, it’s been around forever. Being a democracy, we call it a motion to vacate the Chair. But if you live in a parliamentary democracy, you would know it as A vote of no confidence. In the UK notes of no confidence are like the House of Commons version of an English layabout calling in sick for a soccer match. They pull it when they don’t feel like working for a day or two.
We take it a bit more seriously here across the sink, Mainly because it’s such a pain in the ass. My research shows that it has only been used twice. Once in 1910, an again against GOP Speaker John Boehner by the Freedom Caucus, pissed at him not being able to stop Obama’s agenda. Boehner survived the challenge. They tried it again in 2015, and this time Boehner resigned from congress, rather than go through that shit again.
I know all that shit Murf, but What is it? Simple answer, if you haven’t seen the rules package, nobody is really sure. When the Freedom Caucus pulled it on Boehner, the rule was what it is now, any one member could call for the motion. When Pelosi took over in 2019, they changed the rule to read that a simple majority of either party could call for the motion. The Freedom Caucus just took its toy back.
But how does it work? For that we’ll have to rely on my 50 year old high school civics class, and my even older but more informative schoolhouse Rock memories. So please excuse any historical inaccuracies. Here we go.
Under the new rule, any single member of the House, from either party can trigger an attempt to vacate the chair by filing a formal motion. Normal House procedure is that the motion be seconded, so the member would need an accomplice. After that, the motion is laid on the floor for debate and procedure. If my memory of Boehner’s 2011 travails is correct, this can take some time. Because there is still a sitting Speaker, all other business doesn’t have to grind to a halt. There is an extended floor debate period, and while that’s going on, whips from both sides are working the floor, pressing their different cases. After the proscribed debate time expires, the motion is put to the floor for a vote. Since the question is a simple Yea or Nay, the electronic voting cards are used.
If the vote fails, as it did with Boehner in 2011, then that’s the end of it. But if it succeeds, then I’m afraid that now we’re in uncharted territory. If my memory of 2011 is correct, the rules then put the Speaker out upon completion and certification of the vote. And since the House can’t function without a Speaker, then the GOP would be faced with an instant replay of the 4 day debacle they just endured next week. Not something you’d think the GOP would want to repeat in this lifetime.
But hold on that. Because if I heard the reporting right, having at least try to learn from their past mistakes, in the new rules, the GOP has streamlined the process to make it easier to elect a replacement. Not having seen the rules changes myself, I have no knowledge of those changes, so I really can’t comment. But it sounds like a double edged sword. Making it easier to replace a Speaker makes it easier to ditch one, but it also tends to bite into your replacement gene pool. Who wants to run for it when they have seen how easily they can be replaced?
Personally I look at this rule change as a BDSM ball gag and choker leash for Matt Gaetz and MTG to yank McCarthy around by. They may be assholes, but they aren’t stupid. They got away with robbing the bank once, and made a shitload of enemies. If they try it again, they run the risk of the other 200 members of the caucus standing up to them, and even going to the Democrats for a new consensus Speaker. All hat and no cattle. But don’t touch that dial anyway. With these crazy shits, who knows?
The stuff published and distributed a couple of weeks ago was bad enough. But there’s plenty of credible reporting of how many awful promises McCarthy made that are in that secret part. We will find out soon enough as I wrote earlier this evening. I was hoping you were right about the “Moderates” but they rolled over faster than even McCarthy. But again I’ll say that for them complaining they didn’t know what they were voting for doesn’t cut it because the information, a LOT of it was out there. They knew goddamned good and well what McCarthy gave away to the crazies to get the Speakership. Every journalist, and every one of us should call bullshit on them when as will surely happen they try to plead ignorance. And the more shit gets flung around the House the more they will try to avoid responsibility for providing the circumstances that allowed it!
“In the UK notes of no confidence are like the House of Commons version of an English layabout calling in sick for a soccer match. They pull it when they don’t feel like working for a day or two.”
I don’t understand why you say this, Murf! Is this a common idea in US political circles? If so, what is it based on?
Votes of No Confidence are called when the Opposition senses they might be able to get some disgruntled backbench MPs on the government side to join them. It means that the MPs on both sides need to all turn up! Political shenanigans it may be, but it’s not *laziness*.
The Freedom Caucus was not the reason John Boehner left when he did. In fact, he stayed 10 months longer than he’d planned. It was public knowledge that he’d committed to retiring when he turned 65. That initially meant that he would retire at the end of his term in 2014 as he turned 65 in November of that year.
But he changed his scheduled retirement date when the Vatican advised the Speaker’s office that there would be a Papal visit to Congress in September 2015. No way was Boehner going to miss that! Every year since he became Speaker in 2007, he’d formerly sent an invitation to the Vatican. He stayed only for that, The Freedom Caucus had nothing to do with it. I’m really surprised that any Democrat would go along with Freedom Caucus propaganda because that’s all it ever was. And it was easily disprovable too because even at their height, the Freedom Caucus never had the numbers to get rid of a Speaker.
You only got one thing wrong: that pair *are*that stupid. Manipulative and tantrum-inclined toddlers who can cause the GOP a lot of problems, but not intelligent. When they don’t get what they want, they scream.and bang their heads on the floor so the mortified sane folks will.do.anything to.stop.the embarrassing shrieks and wails. They couldn’t pass the citizenship test if they had to.