Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

brooklynite

(94,602 posts)
Thu Sep 13, 2018, 04:13 PM Sep 2018

15 Members Pledge to Withhold Speaker Vote Without Rule Changes

Source: Roll Call

At least 15 members of the bipartisan Problems Solvers Caucus have pledged to withhold their vote for speaker if the candidate that emerges as the majority party’s nominee does not back the caucus’s proposed rule changes.

The Problem Solvers unveiled a package of rules changes in late July dubbed “Break the Gridlock.” The proposals aim to open up the legislative process in a way that prioritizes bipartisanship.

Their ideas include a fast-track process for legislation co-sponsored by at least two-thirds of the House; a guarantee each member gets at least one markup of a bipartisan bill in a committee they serve on; a three-fifths threshold to pass bills under a closed rule; and at least one germane amendment from each party for structured rules.

...snip...

At a Thursday luncheon hosted by No Labels, Problem Solvers members Tom O’Halleran, D-Ariz., Brian Fitzpatrick, R-Pa., Stephanie Murphy, D-Fl., and Mike Coffman, R-Colo., all said they supported using the speaker vote as leverage to secure the rules changes.

Read more: http://www.rollcall.com/news/politics/15-members-pledge-to-withhold-speaker-vote-without-rule-changes

18 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
15 Members Pledge to Withhold Speaker Vote Without Rule Changes (Original Post) brooklynite Sep 2018 OP
Interesting Sherman A1 Sep 2018 #1
They may be on to something. If Dems take back either the House and/or Senate, they would alwaysinasnit Sep 2018 #2
So, when Democrats gain control, ChiTownDenny Sep 2018 #5
What I meant was that I would like to see some of the congressional rules reformed to, at the alwaysinasnit Sep 2018 #6
+ 1 ChiTownDenny Sep 2018 #9
Instead of curbing future Supreme Court thefts... DemocracyMouse Sep 2018 #12
Same thing I was thinking Farmer-Rick Sep 2018 #11
+ 1 ChiTownDenny Sep 2018 #17
I was thinking more along the lines of Mr.Bill Sep 2018 #14
HA! ChiTownDenny Sep 2018 #16
Sure, that's how compromise works - Dems give a little, and Russiapublicans lagomorph777 Sep 2018 #18
Well, that's a way to go. I'm not familiar enuf w/the rules to know if these are good. Honeycombe8 Sep 2018 #3
Perhaps a break in working together truly to solve the complex issues of the day. One ... SWBTATTReg Sep 2018 #4
Bipartisanship...what is that? BigmanPigman Sep 2018 #7
hmmm , now that the democratic party looks like winning, some republicans want to do bipartisanship Mr. Sparkle Sep 2018 #8
I may be wrong, but I am very skeptical and suspicious of this. NBachers Sep 2018 #10
so basically only meaningful qazplm135 Sep 2018 #13
I like the sound of this. summer_in_TX Sep 2018 #15

alwaysinasnit

(5,066 posts)
2. They may be on to something. If Dems take back either the House and/or Senate, they would
Thu Sep 13, 2018, 04:32 PM
Sep 2018

do well to reform a lot of the rules so that the Republican shenanigans (like McConnell's theft of not only a Supreme Court spot, but obstructing judicial appointments that Obama put forth) can't be repeated.

alwaysinasnit

(5,066 posts)
6. What I meant was that I would like to see some of the congressional rules reformed to, at the
Thu Sep 13, 2018, 05:49 PM
Sep 2018

very least, curb some of the abuses we've seen from Republicans. If it fosters bipartisanship, that would be commendable.

DemocracyMouse

(2,275 posts)
12. Instead of curbing future Supreme Court thefts...
Thu Sep 13, 2018, 06:11 PM
Sep 2018

...can we we declare McConnell's action against Merrick Garland impeachable? And rescind the stolen seat?

(Republicans always cite an off-hand comment by Biden from 1992 as justification for not even holding a hearing. Biden should make, therefore, ALL US POLICY from now on...)

Farmer-Rick

(10,190 posts)
11. Same thing I was thinking
Thu Sep 13, 2018, 06:11 PM
Sep 2018

Nothing stopping the RepubliCONS and Traitor Trump from being bipartisan right now. Sounds like a scam to sucker the Dems into being controlled by the minority.

They want to tie up the Dems in rules to keep all their liberal plans from being implemented. And Dem leadership are suckers for anything that looks like bipartisan.

If they want bipartisan, then let the RepubliCON Congress implement it.

Mr.Bill

(24,303 posts)
14. I was thinking more along the lines of
Thu Sep 13, 2018, 06:31 PM
Sep 2018

changing the locks on every door in the building and not giving any keys to republicans.

Honeycombe8

(37,648 posts)
3. Well, that's a way to go. I'm not familiar enuf w/the rules to know if these are good.
Thu Sep 13, 2018, 04:40 PM
Sep 2018

They sound good, but I'm not sure.

It sound to me like the Republican would be hurt more by the rules changes, since the Democrats do these things most of the time, anyway. The Dems accepted almost 200 Republican amendments to Obamacare, in return for....not even one Republican vote for it.

SWBTATTReg

(22,143 posts)
4. Perhaps a break in working together truly to solve the complex issues of the day. One ...
Thu Sep 13, 2018, 04:59 PM
Sep 2018

tweet (or series of tweets) and the orange one's mouth don't go near enough in solving any problems of the day, and if anything, makes them worse.

Losing allies by the day, losing trade deals by the day, losing respect by the day...man, we're getting so tired of winning! Sarcasm is dripping here...

Mr. Sparkle

(2,935 posts)
8. hmmm , now that the democratic party looks like winning, some republicans want to do bipartisanship
Thu Sep 13, 2018, 06:00 PM
Sep 2018

its funny how they didnt want to do anything when they had the power.

qazplm135

(7,447 posts)
13. so basically only meaningful
Thu Sep 13, 2018, 06:12 PM
Sep 2018

if the House is very very closely split, otherwise, not enough votes on either side to make a difference.

summer_in_TX

(2,739 posts)
15. I like the sound of this.
Fri Sep 14, 2018, 12:57 AM
Sep 2018

Not sure yet of the pros and cons of this particular proposal, but I think for many reasons we need to take concrete steps that promote bipartisanship.

Working together to solve problems is better for America. It also makes it more likely that when Rs regain control (hopefully not for a very long time and only after serious reform and renewal), we won't have given them an excuse for retaliation. Otherwise it sets up incentives for a vicious cycle of tit for tat as power changes hands.

Having stable, workable rules would be a big improvement for Dems and the whole country.

Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»15 Members Pledge to With...