Nah, way to reasonable means of governing for MAGAmerica to buy into.
Next SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE! 👏🏽
i know it wont. but oh my god would it make me so happy if this actually happened.
Have to ban the Hastert rule
Would you look at that, the adults in the room are putting an offer on the table to be discussed.
EDIT: removed one offer.
I don’t ever want to see another “Dems in disarray” article ever again. Republicans are incapable of governing and they haven’t been able to since Bush and they haven’t had an actual platform since Eisenhower. This especially looks bad because Dems had the same exact majority for the last two years and it was the most productive 2 years of congress since 2009.
Like everything else, this is destined to fail. Well over 90% of House districts are so gerrymandered at this point that winning the primary is essentially winning the election. Even if a Republican member is willing to work with Democrats, it’s an electoral death sentence for that member, because the MAGA 30% in their district can dominate the primary process and get a radicalized far right member elected.
I think a lot of folks have this turned around. House members are the product of their districts. The crazy that you see is the crazy that folks at home want. Go against it and you’ll be out on your bum next year in the primaries.
The current dysfunction will continue until Jan 2025. We can only hope that the 12-15 districts that still actually swing can send Democrats instead of Republicans next cycle.
Don’t ever bet that a politician will sacrifice themselves for the good of the country. Being primaried is the main reason that even more reasonable Republicans go along with the crazy. Everyone saw what happened to McCarthy after he did it twice (Debt Ceiling, Govt. shutdown). No moderate Republicans are going to stick their neck out like that just to have it chopped off in a primary next year.
ga2500ev
Migraine warning for non-scrolling left sadobar.
It’s really cool to see someone proposing a solution that isn’t designed for maximum chaos
Weird how this works in the rest of the world. But can’t work in America!?
Good faith is wasted on the undead Mr. Jeffries
I might be hoping for too much here, but this is such a great idea and I really really want it to have more than a snowball’s chance in hell.
By Republican creed and mantra… any Republican that read, listened or accidently overheard the coalition proposal is hereby considered a RINO and should be primaried by a no-nonsense MAGA
/s
I know this has little chance of actually happening, but it’d be so great if it did. Moving towards governing coalitions and weakening the influence of parties is closer to what the founders intended in the first place.
We aren’t moving to a parliamentary system any time soon, but this would be effectively a huge step in that direction. It’d incentivize good faith negotiation, compromise, coalition building, transparency, centrism, and fulfilling the agreements one makes.
Oh, yeah, after doing the work of the elected domestic terrorists to fire KevieMac, the corpoDems still don’t get that they are dealing with elected domestic terrorists.
Fucking corpoDems!
American democracy works by way of tyranny of the majority. Just because 50% plus one want something doesn’t mean it should happen. I understand the democracy is the best form of government we have but it still isn’t a very good one. We need to focus on consensus forming more than majority support.
Imagine if you lived in a 5 person household and everything was decided three to two. There would always be two people who are very upset. And when they finally got One person on their side they would take it out on the other two. Decisions will devolve into revenge.
This is the current state of affairs in American politics. We sorely need to change it.
Imagine what this country could be like if we had an actual coalition government
> One path forward toward this is a proposal made by the House Select Committee on the Modernization of Congress to convene a legislative process task force to discuss rules changes to “reciprocated consideration for widely supported, bipartisan legislation,” as outlined in the panel’s report on fostering collaboration and civility in Congress.
A committee…made a proposal…to convene a task force…to discuss…rule changes.
Well, I like the idea, but I can’t help but notice that’s like four steps removed from taking action.
I’m all for the idea but I’ll believe it when I see it when it comes to there being enough GOP members willing to vote for a Democrat as speaker.
I mean in theory that’s basically what Congress is meant to always be. That’s what reaching a vote majority means. It just took some adults in the room to remind a GOP that had become increasingly, extremely, “if you’re for it we are against it.”
It’s gotten to the point that I wouldn’t be surprised to read an article saying some major funding and bill passed after democrats just bluffed and said they hated the idea, or named it the “Trump-Halliburton bill for punching children” or whatever.
This is how it used to work.
That’s how it’s supposed to work
Hakeem Jeffries leads a PAC that primaries progressives
Or the GOP picks a moderate member and they make some bipartisan rule agreements. There are Republicans are still a majority, so I can see them wanting the speaker to be a Republican. But there’s no reason that they couldn’t find a compromise candidate that could get 300 or more votes.
If I’m reading this right, it sounds like Jeffries is proposing rule changes to bypass committees and just let stuff get voted on directly on the floor?
To become speaker McCarthy put a bunch of extreme nutjobs (*i.e. MTG*) on committees because they were the minority holdouts refusing to vote for him. I think when a bill gets proposed, it goes to the appropriate committee and those nutjobs can just kill it before anyone gets to vote on it, even if 80% of the house want it.
By taking away power from the committees with the whackos, it just turns into consensus of the entire house more so. If I’m understanding it correctly. He also says the details are TBD during discussions.
Form a, “let’s legislate for a change” caucus
This would be almost pointless with a reform of the filibuster in the Senate.
Whoa whoa whoa. That sounds *way* too much like Democracy for these Republicans.
And thats how you do politics.
If there’s plans to put a federally funded sewage plant near me, I want a local representative to argue against it.
It’s so crazy that a small extreme minority of congress dictates the business of congress. It would be great if the parties could talk across the aisle. There is much they could agree on.
He’s an amazing leader. I doubt the children on the other side would go for it.
32 comments
Nah, way to reasonable means of governing for MAGAmerica to buy into.
Next SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE! 👏🏽
i know it wont. but oh my god would it make me so happy if this actually happened.
Have to ban the Hastert rule
Would you look at that, the adults in the room are putting an offer on the table to be discussed.
EDIT: removed one offer.
I don’t ever want to see another “Dems in disarray” article ever again. Republicans are incapable of governing and they haven’t been able to since Bush and they haven’t had an actual platform since Eisenhower. This especially looks bad because Dems had the same exact majority for the last two years and it was the most productive 2 years of congress since 2009.
Like everything else, this is destined to fail. Well over 90% of House districts are so gerrymandered at this point that winning the primary is essentially winning the election. Even if a Republican member is willing to work with Democrats, it’s an electoral death sentence for that member, because the MAGA 30% in their district can dominate the primary process and get a radicalized far right member elected.
I think a lot of folks have this turned around. House members are the product of their districts. The crazy that you see is the crazy that folks at home want. Go against it and you’ll be out on your bum next year in the primaries.
The current dysfunction will continue until Jan 2025. We can only hope that the 12-15 districts that still actually swing can send Democrats instead of Republicans next cycle.
Don’t ever bet that a politician will sacrifice themselves for the good of the country. Being primaried is the main reason that even more reasonable Republicans go along with the crazy. Everyone saw what happened to McCarthy after he did it twice (Debt Ceiling, Govt. shutdown). No moderate Republicans are going to stick their neck out like that just to have it chopped off in a primary next year.
ga2500ev
Migraine warning for non-scrolling left sadobar.
It’s really cool to see someone proposing a solution that isn’t designed for maximum chaos
Weird how this works in the rest of the world. But can’t work in America!?
Good faith is wasted on the undead Mr. Jeffries
I might be hoping for too much here, but this is such a great idea and I really really want it to have more than a snowball’s chance in hell.
By Republican creed and mantra… any Republican that read, listened or accidently overheard the coalition proposal is hereby considered a RINO and should be primaried by a no-nonsense MAGA
/s
I know this has little chance of actually happening, but it’d be so great if it did. Moving towards governing coalitions and weakening the influence of parties is closer to what the founders intended in the first place.
We aren’t moving to a parliamentary system any time soon, but this would be effectively a huge step in that direction. It’d incentivize good faith negotiation, compromise, coalition building, transparency, centrism, and fulfilling the agreements one makes.
Oh, yeah, after doing the work of the elected domestic terrorists to fire KevieMac, the corpoDems still don’t get that they are dealing with elected domestic terrorists.
Fucking corpoDems!
American democracy works by way of tyranny of the majority. Just because 50% plus one want something doesn’t mean it should happen. I understand the democracy is the best form of government we have but it still isn’t a very good one. We need to focus on consensus forming more than majority support.
Imagine if you lived in a 5 person household and everything was decided three to two. There would always be two people who are very upset. And when they finally got One person on their side they would take it out on the other two. Decisions will devolve into revenge.
This is the current state of affairs in American politics. We sorely need to change it.
Imagine what this country could be like if we had an actual coalition government
> One path forward toward this is a proposal made by the House Select Committee on the Modernization of Congress to convene a legislative process task force to discuss rules changes to “reciprocated consideration for widely supported, bipartisan legislation,” as outlined in the panel’s report on fostering collaboration and civility in Congress.
A committee…made a proposal…to convene a task force…to discuss…rule changes.
Well, I like the idea, but I can’t help but notice that’s like four steps removed from taking action.
I’m all for the idea but I’ll believe it when I see it when it comes to there being enough GOP members willing to vote for a Democrat as speaker.
I mean in theory that’s basically what Congress is meant to always be. That’s what reaching a vote majority means. It just took some adults in the room to remind a GOP that had become increasingly, extremely, “if you’re for it we are against it.”
It’s gotten to the point that I wouldn’t be surprised to read an article saying some major funding and bill passed after democrats just bluffed and said they hated the idea, or named it the “Trump-Halliburton bill for punching children” or whatever.
This is how it used to work.
That’s how it’s supposed to work
Hakeem Jeffries leads a PAC that primaries progressives
Or the GOP picks a moderate member and they make some bipartisan rule agreements. There are Republicans are still a majority, so I can see them wanting the speaker to be a Republican. But there’s no reason that they couldn’t find a compromise candidate that could get 300 or more votes.
If I’m reading this right, it sounds like Jeffries is proposing rule changes to bypass committees and just let stuff get voted on directly on the floor?
To become speaker McCarthy put a bunch of extreme nutjobs (*i.e. MTG*) on committees because they were the minority holdouts refusing to vote for him. I think when a bill gets proposed, it goes to the appropriate committee and those nutjobs can just kill it before anyone gets to vote on it, even if 80% of the house want it.
By taking away power from the committees with the whackos, it just turns into consensus of the entire house more so. If I’m understanding it correctly. He also says the details are TBD during discussions.
Form a, “let’s legislate for a change” caucus
This would be almost pointless with a reform of the filibuster in the Senate.
Whoa whoa whoa. That sounds *way* too much like Democracy for these Republicans.
And thats how you do politics.
If there’s plans to put a federally funded sewage plant near me, I want a local representative to argue against it.
It’s so crazy that a small extreme minority of congress dictates the business of congress. It would be great if the parties could talk across the aisle. There is much they could agree on.
He’s an amazing leader. I doubt the children on the other side would go for it.