“The House is out next week.” In what other job in America could you take so much time off of work without completing one of the most basic tasks of the job (passing a budget)?
What precisely is their incentive now to adhere to these new March deadlines when they’ve recklessly and carelessly blown through all of the previous ones they set for themselves?
THIS is how you conduct yourself in an election year when you want to convince voters to let you keep control of the House? That’s one hell of a sales pitch.
You are absolutely right. But what's funny about the modern Congress is that these people really can't stand being around each other for very long. They don't really want to put in the work by being in DC for extended periods of time. I still think locking everyone in a room with bowls of chocolate and Ex-Lax to spur a deal might work.
The link you provided to the article about the Hastert Rule was a fascinating dive into the idea of governance by 'the majority of the majority'. I was particularly intrigued by the notion that when coalitions are formed in this way we are immediately confronted with a Congress that appears considerably more conservative (or liberal, depending on the party in the majority) than the ideological midpoint of the house at a whole. This being true because the controlling vote for success or failure for any legislation to even be considered is the member at the center of the majority party - not the member at the center of the chamber as a whole.
I was equally intrigued by these sentences near the end of the article:
"...the great irony is that the small band of Republican renegades in Congress only want to... demand strict party loyalty when they agree with the majority of the Conference." And "In the end, this will either be their undoing, or the undoing of the Republican colleagues."
Upon finishing the article it was particularly interesting to note that it was written more than 10 years ago... but appears to be even more relevant today than it was then.
The Fiscal Commission is bound to fail because Revenue Increases will not be part of the discussion, just cuts to programs. PS. With the National Debt crossing $34 trillion and the richest Americans increasing their wealth by over $2 trillion since the Trump Tax Cuts, we can say that their increased Wealth is a result of the GOP Welfare State
I get the opposition to tax increases. But you cannot cut your way to a balanced budget. Oh wait - you can cut your way to a balanced budget, but there is no way more than a couple of Republicans would ever vote for it, because it would require huge cuts in Social Security and Medicare. If you want to fund those programs properly, they need more revenues. If you don't, then they need cuts.
It couldn’t be more appropriate that the Hastert Rule is named after one of the most disgusting, pedophile rapist in House history. A real hero to those gop rapists, thieves, liars and filth.
Those gop senators who voted against the CR are filth. It’s disgusting how they keep getting re-elected by morons who actively make those idiot right wing voter’s life worse.
“The House is out next week.” In what other job in America could you take so much time off of work without completing one of the most basic tasks of the job (passing a budget)?
What precisely is their incentive now to adhere to these new March deadlines when they’ve recklessly and carelessly blown through all of the previous ones they set for themselves?
THIS is how you conduct yourself in an election year when you want to convince voters to let you keep control of the House? That’s one hell of a sales pitch.
You are absolutely right. But what's funny about the modern Congress is that these people really can't stand being around each other for very long. They don't really want to put in the work by being in DC for extended periods of time. I still think locking everyone in a room with bowls of chocolate and Ex-Lax to spur a deal might work.
The link you provided to the article about the Hastert Rule was a fascinating dive into the idea of governance by 'the majority of the majority'. I was particularly intrigued by the notion that when coalitions are formed in this way we are immediately confronted with a Congress that appears considerably more conservative (or liberal, depending on the party in the majority) than the ideological midpoint of the house at a whole. This being true because the controlling vote for success or failure for any legislation to even be considered is the member at the center of the majority party - not the member at the center of the chamber as a whole.
I was equally intrigued by these sentences near the end of the article:
"...the great irony is that the small band of Republican renegades in Congress only want to... demand strict party loyalty when they agree with the majority of the Conference." And "In the end, this will either be their undoing, or the undoing of the Republican colleagues."
Upon finishing the article it was particularly interesting to note that it was written more than 10 years ago... but appears to be even more relevant today than it was then.
Folks, if you skipped past this link on the Hastert Rule in Jamie's post today, it's worth a read: https://www.congressionalinstitute.org/2013/07/17/the-hastert-rule/
Yes, the irony is that the antics of the Freedom Caucus are producing more liberal outcomes in the House.
Can we all agree that the Hastert Rule is the dumbest damn thing that is motivated by party over politics?
The Fiscal Commission is bound to fail because Revenue Increases will not be part of the discussion, just cuts to programs. PS. With the National Debt crossing $34 trillion and the richest Americans increasing their wealth by over $2 trillion since the Trump Tax Cuts, we can say that their increased Wealth is a result of the GOP Welfare State
I get the opposition to tax increases. But you cannot cut your way to a balanced budget. Oh wait - you can cut your way to a balanced budget, but there is no way more than a couple of Republicans would ever vote for it, because it would require huge cuts in Social Security and Medicare. If you want to fund those programs properly, they need more revenues. If you don't, then they need cuts.
i love it when Jamie provides links! Reading the actual document is so enlightening!
Eliminating the electors: citizens directly choosing their “chief officers”
Hmmmm….funny how that is so relevant to a certain reading of the 14A
Oh good. A Blue Ribbon Committee on the deficit. That’s the best kind of committee. I’m sure everything will be peachy now.
What do you think? Too sarcastic? Just enough?
It couldn’t be more appropriate that the Hastert Rule is named after one of the most disgusting, pedophile rapist in House history. A real hero to those gop rapists, thieves, liars and filth.
Those gop senators who voted against the CR are filth. It’s disgusting how they keep getting re-elected by morons who actively make those idiot right wing voter’s life worse.
“He brought an 8-inch hunting knife for his tourist visit.” I love your sense of humor, Jamie!
Is the Past Speaker's office (closet) vacant now that McCarthy is gone? Feels like a jinx for Johnson.
I have walked by it a couple of times in recent weeks but haven't seen anyone going in or out. There were some newspapers there the other day.