HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Latest Breaking News (Forum) » 15 Members Pledge to With...

Thu Sep 13, 2018, 04:13 PM

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, 2986 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread

Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Thu Sep 13, 2018, 04:20 PM

1. Interesting

we will see what happens.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Thu Sep 13, 2018, 04:32 PM

2. They may be on to something. If Dems take back either the House and/or Senate, they would

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.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to alwaysinasnit (Reply #2)

Thu Sep 13, 2018, 05:31 PM

5. So, when Democrats gain control,

there needs to be bipartisanship.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ChiTownDenny (Reply #5)

Thu Sep 13, 2018, 05:49 PM

6. What I meant was that I would like to see some of the congressional rules reformed to, at the

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

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to alwaysinasnit (Reply #6)

Thu Sep 13, 2018, 06:02 PM

9. + 1

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ChiTownDenny (Reply #9)

Thu Sep 13, 2018, 06:11 PM

12. Instead of curbing future Supreme Court thefts...

...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...)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ChiTownDenny (Reply #5)

Thu Sep 13, 2018, 06:11 PM

11. Same thing I was thinking

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.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Farmer-Rick (Reply #11)

Fri Sep 14, 2018, 01:08 PM

17. + 1

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ChiTownDenny (Reply #5)

Thu Sep 13, 2018, 06:31 PM

14. I was thinking more along the lines of

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

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Mr.Bill (Reply #14)

Fri Sep 14, 2018, 01:07 PM

16. HA!

That works.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ChiTownDenny (Reply #5)

Fri Sep 14, 2018, 02:39 PM

18. Sure, that's how compromise works - Dems give a little, and Russiapublicans

get a lot.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Thu Sep 13, 2018, 04:40 PM

3. Well, that's a way to go. I'm not familiar enuf w/the rules to know if these are good.

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.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Thu Sep 13, 2018, 04:59 PM

4. Perhaps a break in working together truly to solve the complex issues of the day. One ...

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...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Thu Sep 13, 2018, 05:56 PM

7. Bipartisanship...what is that?

It's been so long I forget.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Thu Sep 13, 2018, 06:00 PM

8. hmmm , now that the democratic party looks like winning, some republicans want to do bipartisanship

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

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Thu Sep 13, 2018, 06:04 PM

10. I may be wrong, but I am very skeptical and suspicious of this.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Thu Sep 13, 2018, 06:12 PM

13. so basically only meaningful

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

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Fri Sep 14, 2018, 12:57 AM

15. I like the sound of this.

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.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread