>

How the hell did he pull that off?
Includes rule that all bills must be available to read 72 hours before the vote. Also includes last-minute addition containing the final concessions given to the Freedom Caucus that only the handful of people that wrote it got to see before voting on it. >

While simultaneously jamming 6 or so bills through, and 2 concurrent resolutions that will be treated as read.
Read Section 5. >


Read Section 5.

Could you explain? I am trying to get this, but so far my reading of the rules package indicates that the new 72 hour rule only applies to Calendar Wednesday described in Clause 6(a) of rule XV. You say there is something that effects this under "section 5". Clause 5 of rule XV talks about the "Private Calendar" so this isn't the section 5 you are talking about. >

Section 5, which starts on page 50 of the rules package will move into immediately passing 10 (exact count) bills and 2 concurrent resolutions that will not be read, all points of contention on the bills are waived, and only an hour debate split between parties for each. >


that will not be read

The wording "shall be considered as read" is standard. I think you are reading more into this than is actually there.
​

all points of contention on the bills are waived

All points of order against the bills are waived. This is standard for special rules like this. Otherwise, what would be the point of using special rules?
​

only an hour of debate split between parties

Sometimes it is an hour, sometimes it is two hours. Very rarely it is some other amount of time. So this is also standard.
​
You seem to be seeing this as jamming through legislation, when in actuality this is the special rules that are normally used. >

I liked my life better when I was in my early 20’s and didn’t care about politics. Now, I just realize what a shit show this life really is. >

The good news is that you can be part of the solution now. And you're not alone. There were a ton of young voters turning out for the election last year. >

How? I’ve voted for the party that is promised to “solve” these problems in the last 3 elections and will continue to do so. It’s not a solution. Contributing to a stalemate is just beating your head against a wall. Voting means nothing in this country with gerrymandering and the electoral college. Not to mention voting for either party really just locks us into slow churning dysfunctional partisan politics at the congressional level. >

Unfortunately, people have to keep voting until Democrats have a super majority in the Senate and there are more progressives in their party to hold them accountable if they want to see any meaningful change. That’s probably going to take a decade of consistently voting blue. This goes down the ballot to local state legislators. The only reason Republicans have control of the house is because of Gerrymandering in Wisconsin, Ohio, North Carolina, Tennessee, etc. State legislatures are the ones drawing the maps. Progress is slow, but taking away progress is relatively quick. >

That's ironic, given it was CSPAN in the house chambers that led to these clowns even getting a platform in the first place (Gingrich used to give speeches to an empty house late at night because he knew people could still watch him on CSPAN).
edit: Although this is not an end to CSPAN's broadcasting of the house - they just have to rely on the feed that the house provides rather than their own crews and cameras. >

Which, in all honesty is how they've operated for decades. This isn't in anyway new or partisan. We just got some cool footage due to there being no rules package until the speaker could get one voted on. >

Thank you, I did not know that! >

Yea, during the speaker votes CSPAN kept mentioning their unique ability at the time to have their own cameras inside. >

I didn’t catch the CSPAN bus until the last 2 days. We don’t have it and spaced out the feed was on YouTube >

I was watching on youtube >

Ok, question. Can McCarthy have only Republicans on all the committees? >

I believe Jeffries can recommend people for the committee to make it bi-partisan, but McCarthy can say no to anyone. >

Get ready for all Republican committees. 😠 >

Thats literally not allowed >

All saber rattling aside they all fall in line no matter how concerned they are. >

I suppose I was hoping for too much. If this pattern continues, that's not a good sign for the Democrats in 2024, as that means a much tougher road. >

It will be a circus for 2 years. Actually no,  circus is at least entertaining. This will be painful. >

Honestly, given the Senate, it'll likely just be boring. Nothing they pass will make it through the Senate. >

It won't be boring if the House fails to raise the debt ceiling and causes the US to default on its debts (due to already committed spending) and/or the federal government is forced to shutdown for an extended period of time.  There are some thing that the House needs to do for our country to continue functioning, and I worry it won't be capable of doing so. >

...that threat has happened nearly every session since I was in high school when Obama first got elected. Like legit that threat is made every time it comes about but they won't do that because it would devalue the dollar which makes them poorer. They can threaten it, they can posture, but at the end of the day their wallets will make them vote on it. B-o-r-i-n-g. >

Every other time the Republicans have made the threat it was pretty obviously a threat to try to get something.  Right now we have at least 20 Republicans in the House who seem to legitimately want to hurt the country (and in particular the federal government) in whatever way they can, and I think they would actually follow through with it.  I doubt it is even a majority of Republicans in the House who want that, but if it only takes 6 of them to oust McCarthy as Speaker, the only way I see to avoid it is for McCarthy's speakership to fail and a cross-party coalition to form in the House.  Are there enough Republicans who would rather that happen than tear the whole thing down? >

It doesn't take 6 of them to remove McCarthy as speaker. That's assuming the Democrats would vote alongside the Q-Anon caucus to remove McCarthy, which is unlikely >

I am assuming the Dems would vote to remove McCarthy as Speaker if anyone ever forces that vote.  They didn't want him as Speaker to start with, so why wouldn't they vote to remove him if given the opportunity? >

Why would they vote to remove him as speaker if all they would get was someone from the Q-Anon caucus? They would not. The Q-Anon caucus is assuming the Democrats are as dumb as they are, which is not the case. They would have no reason to support them or give the Q-Anon caucus a political win. They might not like McCarthy, but giving power to someone even more destructive is not in their interest. >

What I’m truly shocked at is they are hovering like they swept congress and took both houses when they barely - barely - took the house. >

Exactly! They really shouldn’t be strutting around like they won the Super Bowl!!! >

Will you be updating this comment as more chairs are made public? >

Sure, i can do that! >

Thanks! >

I want to see motions to vacate every day. >

I make motions to vacate every day, but no one ever wants to see it. 😞 >

This is going to be a long two years. >

I guess the moderate republicans weren't all that concerned with it... >

Go along to get along. >

Which just proves there's zero difference between them and McCarthy just has a humiliation fetish. >

So everyday the house goes into session the Democrats should force a vote with a motion to Vacate. >

I think that will backfire. Republicans looked bad when they spent a week arguing over who the Speaker would be from their own party. If Democrats motion to vacate the Speaker, I think a few things would happen:
1) The narrative would be that Dems are obstructing business in the House, forcing a vote over and over when their candidate would never win the majority
2) Republicans would fall in line behind McCarthy again simply because the motion came from the Dems. They already slugged it out over Speaker, so they've made peace with the decision to have McCarthy for now. There may be infighting and his own caucus may eat him alive, but if Dems initiate it, it will always die on the floor. In their circles, they can spin their decision to oust one of their own, but their base will not tolerate them being foiled by Democrats. >

Unless there are a number of Repubs missing that day. Isn't the number as low as 8 or 11 absent/just hitting "present" enough to make the majority work at 212 Democratic Party votes? >

I mean, maybe... but it would be a short-lived victory. The next time all the Republicans were in the chamber, they could vote to vacate and take over the Speakership again. Even if they lucked into a day where more Dems were present than Republicans, I don't see a political advantage in seizing the reins. Are they gonna swoop in for some mega-session where they vacate the current speaker, vote in a new one, and quickly pass a new rules package slamming the door on Republicans? I'm no parliamentarian, but I don't think that's possible. And you'd need every Dem to sign on. They were unified behind Jeffries, but it doesn't mean they'd all be willing to stick their neck out to vacate the chair. Some of these folks were elected by thin margins... some may find it safer to be the adults in the room while the Republicans spin their wheels on unpopular policies and pointless investigations. >

Enough GOP Reps are out of town. Motion to Vacate. Elect Jeffries. Quickly pass a new rules package. Pass any legislation they want before the GOP can get it's act together and reorganize. >

More importantly, Jefferies will control what bills go to the floor >

Oh look, Republicans acting like useless corrupt trash again.  Sadly that isn't really newsworthy, it's just the definition of being a Republican these days. >

Acting? >

Good point!  ;) >


"In fact, there was broad agreement spending cuts should focus on NON-DEFENSE discretionary spending. This means cutting funding for the woke & weaponized bureaucrats that received massive increases under the $1.7 trillion omnibus. (This IS NOT Social Security/Medicare)," his office said in a series of tweets.

Ummmmm …. Debt interest, Defense, social security, and Medicare make up more than half government spending.   What else you going to cut Roy? Education? >

Education, science/CDC, EPA, IRS, SEC, FEC, consumer protection agency, etc.
Key words being "woke & weaponized bureaucrats". They want to keep gutting the government so their donors can keep raping and pillaging. >

Republicans about to show their ass to all of America for the next 2 years. >

Meanwhile, boehner leans back in his lazyboy and lights a bowl thinking, “It could be worse - it could be me again.” >

Bring back Congress sexting drama >

so no cameras for the public and no metal detectors? seems like they want shit to go down and then create a narrative >

There are still fixed cameras owned by the Federal Government that CSpan can access,  but no more sexy in the trenches covering >

Time for unfettered fascism from the (definitely not a cult) Republicans. >

You say that like the red wave came. The News cycle is gonna suck, but we have systems in place to limit the damage. >

Yeah, Like the SCOTUS....
​
....ohh wait, NVM, they are far right activists.... >

Why couldn’t the semi-reasonable republicans join the democrats in voting down the crazy rules package? Like concede to the crazies to elect a speaker and then pull the rug and just not pass the crazy rules? >


Why couldn’t the semi-reasonable republicans join the democrats in voting down the crazy rules package?

For the same reason Santa Claus doesn't join the Easter Bunny for a cup of tea >

Chasing Amy >

I didn't think of that when I typed it, but I SHOULD have! >

Buckle up buckaroos! >

Gym Jordan leading a committee is the stuff of nightmares. >

I would love to see a Democrat bring a Motion to Vacate and see what happens. >

I believe that rule only applies to republicans >

The article linked above says either party. >

Investigations and making noise is all they got. Not a single piece of legislation they pass has a hope in hell of passing. Until the money runs out and then it is going to be drive the economy into the toilet by defaulting on debt payments. >

And every subpoena should earn this response: “We are following the guidance of Jim Jordan, Chairman of the Judiciary Committee. When he deems it suitable to comply with congressional subpoenas, we will join him.” And since the Jan 6 committee has been disbanded and Gymmy can’t even fulfill his obligation, that’s the end of all compliance. >

They confirmed shut down the committee? Did it release it's findings? >

Well, get ready for a US debt default, huh. >

Their doners don’t want that to happen. It’s just chicken >

With a AI’s becoming more and more prevalent, if I was in charge of money from the democratic caucus, I would be creating an AI that could easily scan through these thousand page bills to look for a specific keywords, and become a learning program, that specifically will highlight problems with the bills in regards to undermining democracy. >

That would create longer bills unfortunately. >

AI’s are extremely fast, you could create a bill that was 100,000 pages and if we had the right AI it could spit out results within minutes >

And it would countered by making the bills longer to the point it would take hours to a day to go through the bills >

This is further proof that the current Republicans in congress are astonishingly out of touch with reality and have no interest in actual governance. They continue to interpret accountability as persecution. >

Can someone. Anyone. Give me a good, honest, solid answer here. How long is it going to take?
Is the country doomed? Has Fascism won? Does anything matter anymore? When are we allowed to collectively panic? >

Well for anything to get far it has to pass the Democratic Senate and Biden needs to sign it. So a lot of this will just be theater in place of doing something productive. The question will be is will Republicans be over the circus in 2 years or not? >

They can still hold the debt ceiling hostage and later shut down the government without the senate or president. >

There will be a game of chicken over the debt ceiling, but the majority of corporations and the investor class want to avoid a complete economic meltdown. I guess we’ll see if they really do burn it all down. >

Rule #1:  Chase those Jewish Space Lasers....right Majorie?
Rule #2:  Legalize teenage sex trafficking...right Matt?
Rule #3:  Indict Hunter Biden's laptop...right Kevin?
Rule #4:  Coronation of Donald Trump....right Donald?