Yep, McCarthy is still at 201. However, Donalds is steadily shedding votes. Gaetz voted for Trump again, and two others switched to Kevin Hern of Oklahoma. I don't know anything about the guy, though Wikipedia sort of implies he played some role in the Challenger disaster, which I don't think is true. He probably lost his job at Rockwell because they downsized afterward.
16 thoughts on “8th vote, still 201 votes for McCarthy”
Comments are closed.
Assuming that the fact that he's a Republican member of Congress is not enough for you, barking loon Boebert voted for Hern. Do you really need to know anything more about him?
I would think that if he designed the O rings on Challenger, that should be a real vote catcher with the GOP. Surprised that Santos hasn't received any love on the floor of the House. A complete fabulist is just perfect for the GOP
Come on, let's do 9! Nine failed votes! Nine failed votes for the McCarthy, who above all else desired power.*
* Unironically true.
Not that Qevin would know what to do with power, if he got it. But that's okay! He already gave away all the Speaker's power to his Wackaloon Caucus. They know exactly what they want to do, and it has nothing to do with "goo-goo" (the Republican term for "good government.")
Well, they listened to you and...McCarthy going down again...
The Dems need to start shaking things up, the Republicans don't know how to put on a good show.
How about next time, they all vote for Hunter Biden?
Or Liz Cheney? Or Adam Kinzinger?
Or George Santos? (If that is his real &tc.)
The Democrats would never vote for Cheney, but I can imagine Kinzinger.
It will have to wait until next week, though, when they get up to the possibility of winning by plurality, because Jeffries possibly doesn't want to win that way, because still nothing could get done. Kinzinger, though Republican, may be the least destructive option.
Who decides whether to vote by plurality? I assume someone on the floor makes that motion, and then there is a vote.
Why has nobody made such a motion yet?
I don't know, but it may be something like it would need a majority vote and everyone assumes it won't work, at least until they flog this dead horse into oblivion.
Or, it will take a majority vote to move to a plurality vote and the lunatics won't do it because that would mean either voting for McCarthy or not voting for McCarthy and getting Jeffries.
So this present state is just fine with them, they're so powerful and manly.
I'm not sure any rules changes can be approved if the Speakership is vacant. If so it's a real catch-22.
Three failed votes per day seems to be all the "ruling" Republican caucus is capable of, so it shouldn't be long now. And tomorrow, rinse and repeat! It's "democracy inaction".
Stand firm, Democrats, and keep voting for Leader Jeffries. At some point, Republicans will start just walking out in disgust with their Wackaloon Caucus, and decrease the denominator to where Jeffries will be IN!
I was a bit surprised to learn that we actually don't have a House of Representatives at this point (or, rather, we don't have any members of the House: none of them have been sworn in yet).
It's an odd arrangement, and, as far as I can tell, this is based on House rules (I couldn't find it in the text of the constitution). Shouldn't the "swearing in" bit be strictly ceremonial? Perhaps they should consider changing this rule? Or, if the oath is constitutionally required, perhaps it can be administered collectively by the clerk when the members elect first convene? (They could always do individual ceremonial oaths later, for those who want photos).
It's all very bizarre.
PS—I am elated to see the former president got some votes. I hope this ignites a groundswell in future rounds. Trump would provide the gravitas our Congress so sorely lacks.
House rules indeed!
[House Practice: A Guide to the Rules, Precedents and Procedures of the House]
[Chapter 34. Office of the Speaker]
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/GPO-HPRACTICE-108/html/GPO-HPRACTICE-108-35.htm
Sec. 1 . Role of Speaker
The Speaker is the presiding officer of the House and is charged
with numerous duties and responsibilities by law and by the House
rules. As the presiding officer of the House, the Speaker maintains
order, manages its proceedings, and governs the administration of its
business. Manual Sec. 622; Deschler Ch 6 Sec. Sec. 2-8. The major
functions of the Speaker with respect to the consideration of measures
on the floor include recognizing Members who seek to address the House
(Manual Sec. 949), construing and applying the House rules (Manual
Sec. 627), and putting the question on matters arising on the floor to
a vote (Manual Sec. 630).
that last part
construing and applying the House rules (Manual
Sec. 627), and putting the question on matters arising on the floor to
a vote (Manual Sec. 630).
is what keeps anything from happening unless/until there is a speaker...methinks
Right. There would also appear to be a law stipulating that the Speaker administer the oath of office to House members:
https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/United_States_Statutes_at_Large/Volume_1/1st_Congress/1st_Session/Chapter_1
So, it's possible that, in addition to simple rules changes, clarifying legislation might be needed to reform the swearing in process (for instance, allowing a signed oath of office to suffice). It's all above my pay grade.
In any event something be done.