Wednesday, October 07, 2015

Ideas that Need More Thought: Support the Republican Speaker Nominee or Be "Ostracized"

Apparently some Republicans in the House think it would help Republican unity to "ostracize" all Republicans who don't vote for the majority candidate for Speaker (and other positions?). From Pete Kasperowicz
House Republicans are considering a change to House rules that would force GOP lawmakers to either vote for the new House speaker nominee, or be "ostracized" from the Republican Party and lose all committee assignments. 
Rep. Dennis Ross, R-Fla., said on C-SPAN that the idea behind this possible rule change is to force Republicans to unite around one leader, and end the squabbling that has divided the party for the last few years. 
"There may also be a rule change proposed that says if you don't support the nominee of the conference on the floor of the House, that you will be ostracized, or otherwise removed from the conference, and your committee assignments may be taken away," he said.
The fear is that there will not be 218 votes to elect a Speaker.

Hmm. The Republicans now have 247 members in their caucus. They are afraid of losing 30 in the vote for Speaker. That same 30 means the difference between controlling the House or not.  If you need 30 for a majority, how smart is it to antagonize them? And push them out of your conference?

And what does it do to committee assignments? Do Republicans just give up their members on some committees so they no longer have the majority. Not smart. Or dole out the assignments of the 30 among the 217? As though the current committees are getting necessary work done.

Rep. Ross argues for open process in presenting bills in the House. But he seems not to have the same open process view as regards leadership positions. Sounds like his position needs some fine tuning to be consistent.

See the CSPAN video of the interview with Rep. Ross. About the 27:00 mark is where he talks about the possible rule changes.

H/T Byron York


MAX Redline said...

Yes, that's an incredibly brilliant move by the GOPe - which again points to the need for term limits. Oh sure, "just vote them out" - but they have so much cash flowing in to reinforce their careers. And that's something that was never envisioned: career politicians, and all of them lawyers? Hardly a citizen government.

T. D. said...

It seemed a crazy statement to make after all Ross' talk about making the legislative process more open and the need to make compromises. Except, I guess, for voting for leadership. Apparently no compromises there or openness to other opinions. You're right the sense of entitlement that comes with being voted in again and again is poisonous.

OregonGuy said...

Watched "Maria..." this morning. It's disappointing how easily the elite dismiss conservatives as simply crazy.

T. D. said...

It's amazing. Even Fox News people keep suggesting there is a disaster in Washington like the government will collapse. Huh?

Anybody notice a difference in how effective Congress is today than it was two weeks ago? That pipeline of good legislation was suddenly stopped?

What's fun is when a guest they expect to agree with them (Mark Thiessen from the Bush administration) sees no problem at all. Er, uh, ahem.

ZZMike said...

The GOP seems to be on the road to self-destruction. Still, it's not that much different than when Boehner stripped all the new Tea Party guys of their committee assignments (or reassigned them to the Stationery and Supplies Committee).

T. D. said...

ZZ, I agree that this is following an old pattern--a pattern that did not work for Boehner before and is probably one of the reasons he is resigning. The news media, of course, does not cover this aspect. What has Boehner accomplished during his speakership? Nada.