173
submitted 1 year ago by jeffw@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world

The prospect of a government shutdown escalated significantly Tuesday as House Republicans’ intraparty tensions again came to a head in a dramatic floor vote amid negotiations on a nascent plan to keep the government open.

House Republicans’ inability to find agreement on even a stopgap funding bill that is destined to fail in the Senate again puts into focus the challenge before House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) as he tries to unite his party and avoid a government shutdown. Though Republicans largely agree on the need to significantly curb federal spending, divisions mostly over process have given any five lawmakers enormous power in the razor-thin majority.

But as hard-liners dug in on their opposition, their more moderate counterparts began to firm up contingency plans for a bipartisan effort to keep the government open, publicly condemning their colleagues’ obstinance.

Some Republicans are seriously considering getting behind a shell bill that could, as soon as next week, serve as the vehicle that allows moderates to supersede McCarthy’s control of the House floor and force a vote to keep the government open, according to three people familiar with the plan who, like others, spoke on the condition of anonymity to outline preliminary and private conversations. What exactly gets included in such a discharge petition remains unknown, but those familiar with the planning said it would include a short-term funding plan to avert a shutdown that could garner enough support from House Democrats and the Senate.

Such a move would keep McCarthy’s fingerprints off whatever bill is ultimately voted on in the House. But it would undoubtedly irritate colleagues who have said that passing any bill with Democratic votes would immediately trigger a motion to remove McCarthy from the speakership.

Lawmakers familiar with several possible pathways to avert a shutdown — including another deal that could be struck between the Republican Governance Group and New Democrat Coalition — say that any compromise with Democrats would be a last-case scenario for Republicans, who desperately want to see their conference agree on a stopgap bill that could move them into negotiations with the Senate and salvage some of their policy demands on border security.

But that pathway stalled Tuesday when GOP leadership pulled consideration of a noncontroversial procedural vote that would have been a key step toward passing a proposed stopgap funding measure out of the House. At least a dozen hard-right lawmakers — angry over what they say is a lack of information on top-line budget numbers and assurances that the Senate will adhere to their fiscal demands — have stymied efforts to pass the 30-day funding bill.

A number of lawmakers across the ideological spectrum spent most of Tuesday huddling across the office suite of Majority Whip Tom Emmer (R-Minn.) trying to find a path forward. Notably missing was McCarthy, who has allowed lawmakers to take the lead on cobbling up a proposal that can pass.

“It’s not one way or the highway,” McCarthy said at a news conference Tuesday. “It may not look perfect to you, maybe you want one person to decide everything, I don’t think that’s the way government should work. I like a lot of ideas to come up and have the best idea win.”

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] jeremy_sylvis@midwest.social 33 points 1 year ago

It does me good to see the Republicans tearing themselves apart over their own version of a Manchin-esque refusal to compromise.

That said, "it would undoubtedly irritate colleagues who have said that passing any bill with Democratic votes would immediately trigger a motion to remove McCarthy from the speakership" is... as sad as it is hilarious.

[-] TheDoozer@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

Yeah, it's exactly the opposite of how government is supposed to work.

[-] randon31415@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Manchin wanted to compromise. His compromises were just unacceptable. It was Sinema that wouldn't negotiate in public OR in private.

this post was submitted on 20 Sep 2023
173 points (98.3% liked)

politics

19107 readers
2722 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS