Again? Thought they called for this back when Scalise was the designee after the first internal vote...
From the article:
The device: A simple two-paragraph pledge... to vote “yea” on the floor for whoever wins the House Republican conference’s backing... Flood is organizing a bloc of Republicans to withhold support from candidates unless they press their backers to sign the pledge.
They're looking for a written and signed pledge this time.
Would this be legally binding, or just usable to say “shame on you for lying, I have proof you’re a liar”? Because I don’t think the latter would work anymore.
The house can make it's own rules they can bar committee seats for people who go against their pledge. They could also coordinate with donors and PACs and financially ostracize pledge breakers.
Good fucking luck, Republicans. The monolithic party has finally fractured under the weight of their own refusal to compromise. They've been "no true Scotsman" since RINO became a thing.
I mean it sucks for everyone else who depends on a working government, but it was always going to be painful for us as a country and for Republicans in particular to pay the debt on their devil's bargain.
There are a lot of Democrats who openly talk about getting rid of the Senate filibuster. If Democrats do well in 2024 and that happens it's possible that we could see real anti-gerrymandering legislation and I think that could change everything. Democrats typically get more votes in aggregate than Republicans in house races but cracking and packing gerrymandering makes it hard for Democrats to keep control of the house. That could all change.
Filibuster is the dumbest thing.
Any republican policy that's worth filibustering would just be ignored by the general public, anyways.
It seems like it solely benefits minority rule to stop the majority from doing what it wants.
No what I'm saying is the Republicans wouldn't be able to filibuster a democratic agenda. Anti-gerrymandering, police reform, health care reform, etc. there are a lot of Democratic goals that Republicans have consistently blocked.
In my scenario Democrats would control all of Congress and the white house.
Yes, the filibuster only serves to allow Republicans (the minority) to prevent the will of the majority.
If there is ever an issue that the Democrats feel requires filibustering, then the American public is more than likely to just ignore it if it passes. This is because of how wildly unpopular it likely is, and how obvious it would be that loons in red states are trying to control sane people from blue ones.
Lmao this pledge will mean a lot more to all the wooden furniture in Congress than it will to any GOP rep
Edit: I was going for a pun, but maybe it’s too much of a regional product?
It was an ok attempt but could use a little more polish.
Very true. Pledges, like laws, is just ink on paper if no one abides by them or if they're not enforced.
The device: A simple two-paragraph pledge, spearheaded by Rep. Mike Flood (R-Neb.), to vote “yea” on the floor for whoever wins the House Republican conference’s backing in the initial secret-ballot election scheduled for Tuesday. To pick up more commitments, Flood is organizing a bloc of Republicans to withhold support from candidates unless they press their backers to sign the pledge.
Awwww, he's so cute, look at lil' Mike Flood playing politics.
Yea, no this won't work in the slightest. But it is cute. Like a 6 year old drawing. Or a child still believing in Santa.
I'm not gonna hold my breath while waiting for GOP to follow through on this. Or anything else they promise, for that matter.
No I wouldn't either. Someone in another thread called them a "clown-wreck" and it's the best description I've ever heard to describe this whole fiasco.
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
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
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News