Page 40 of 44
Re: Congress
Posted: Wed January 31, 2024 7:45 pm
by Peeps
??
Re: Congress
Posted: Tue February 06, 2024 12:15 am
by Bi_3
Re: Congress
Posted: Tue February 06, 2024 1:07 am
by bart
She was looking good in that scarlet A shirt though
Re: Congress
Posted: Thu February 22, 2024 2:21 pm
by McParadigm
TL;DR - Patrick McHenry (R) believes that the votes are there to easily pass the budget bill if it is brought to the floor. But the Freedom Caucus would respond to the bill’s passage by ousting Mike Johnson as Speaker, and he thinks there’s a 50/50 chance that Johnson lets a shutdown happen rather than risk that.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/house-ukra ... 05-10abh9g
There's a "50-50" chance of a government shutdown in early March, says House Financial Services Chairman Patrick McHenry, of North Carolina, and it's House Speaker Mike Johnson's fear of being ousted that will determine the outcome. And at the same time, McHenry says the House is heading to a procedural "nuclear" war over funding for Ukraine.
"I think the odds [of a shutdown] are 50-50 at this point," McHenry, Republican of North Carolina, told CBS News on "The Takeout" this week. "This is a preventable disaster ... Had we done this in November and December, the policy would be about the same, maybe a little bit better than it is now. But the politics would be much better than they are now."
McHenry said Johnson is still adjusting to the difficulties of leading a small and restive GOP majority. Fear of losing his speakership stalks all shutdown scenarios, he said.
Johnson and Democratic Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer have already negotiated overall spending amounts for defense and domestic programs. All that remains are specific allocations under individual spending bills — and the political backlash that may come from hard-right House Republicans. McHenry said Johnson's fear of that backlash could trigger a shutdown.
"[If] it's fear of the deal that drives him, [that] will then result in a government shutdown," McHenry said. "What I believe is, we will get higher spending and less policy as a result of the government shutdown."
McHenry also said there's a sizable majority of House Republicans and Democrats who support the Senate-passed national security bill that includes military aid to Ukraine, Israel, and Taiwan.
"They support 80 to 90% of what's in the bill," McHenry said. "About two-thirds of the House is of that opinion. It will get done. It will just be a question of how it gets done and how long it will take to get done."
But the current impediment, McHenry said, is Johnson.
"What is axiomatic about the House is that any speaker can stand in the way of the majority will on the House floor for a period of time — but not permanently," McHenry said. "My hope is that the speaker will come around to seeing this in a very sensible way."
Re: Congress
Posted: Thu February 22, 2024 3:09 pm
by tragabigzanda
FUCK ICE
Re: Congress
Posted: Thu February 22, 2024 3:53 pm
by Peeps
the nonsense with kevin was of his own doing. he wanted speaker so bad that he made deals with MAGA (Gaetz) that said if you are unhappy with me it will only take one vote to oust me
Re: Congress
Posted: Thu February 22, 2024 4:13 pm
by McParadigm
I can understand why you’d think that it might. The process would certainly be more proactive and productive with actual political calculus at the helm. A paralyzing ideological purity in any direction ultimately benefits no one.
But the forces producing this inaction would be here either way. And they would think that this is how they win either way.
McCarthy’s solution was to go around them, and make a deal with Democrats (hardly a bad thing to do). That was enough for them to torpedo his Speakership, so I don’t see any evidence whatsoever that there was sustainability to that approach. In fact, I think the fact that he had to give them rope to hang him with in order to even become Speaker says it all. I think reaching across parties was a good approach, but it’s evidentially not one that could be maintained across years…not barring a major shift in power dynamics within the party.
The MAGAs expect to hold power regardless of who is Speaker. They will commit intra-party arson in order to get their way, and they do not negotiate…full stop.
So I do think it’s better that they have to play their hostage-taking games out in the open, rather than in closed door meetings with a normalizing Speaker who has no actual sway over them. I think the best thing for the Republican Party right now would be for non-MAGA legislators to have to come to terms with the fact that no amount of power and no amount of being heard will ever make their far right compatriots more willing to share the pie. As far as they are concerned, it is their pie. How dare you covet it.
If you are asking, do I wish we lived in a world where Republican moderates could continue to guide the legislative process and limit MAGAs to a needed but not dominant political force? Sure. Yes. Please. But that has not happened, and it continues not to happen, and so something else is needed.
I haven’t seen any evidence that hiding their dysfunction behind closed doors moves us in the direction of a resolution. Better to let them do their dance in public.
Re: Congress
Posted: Thu February 29, 2024 2:24 pm
by Bammer
Is there a more broken record than “Congress passes temporary spending bill to avoid government shutdown“?
Re: Congress
Posted: Thu February 29, 2024 7:56 pm
by tragabigzanda
FUCK ICE
Re: Congress
Posted: Fri March 08, 2024 2:29 pm
by wease
And now Santos is running again for Congress. Does he really expect to win?
Re: Congress
Posted: Fri March 08, 2024 10:25 pm
by spike
Re: Congress
Posted: Mon March 11, 2024 8:18 pm
by Alex
somebody should vote all these jokers out.
Re: Congress
Posted: Thu May 23, 2024 6:40 pm
by Bi_3
Finally something good.
Re: Congress
Posted: Thu May 23, 2024 8:57 pm
by B
Bi_3 wrote:Finally something good.
I've always assumed that the government could already track every dollar I spend and "turn off" my money.
Re: Congress
Posted: Fri May 24, 2024 12:25 am
by 96583UP
was this the same bill that defines crypto as a commodity based on certain criteria (vs. a security) ?
Re: Congress
Posted: Fri May 24, 2024 5:03 pm
by E.H. Ruddock
B wrote:
I've always assumed that the government could already track every dollar I spend and "turn off" my money.
Anyone who thinks otherwise is fooling themselves.
Re: Congress
Posted: Fri May 24, 2024 5:20 pm
by simple schoolboy
E.H. Ruddock wrote:B wrote:
I've always assumed that the government could already track every dollar I spend and "turn off" my money.
Anyone who thinks otherwise is fooling themselves.
Sure, but there's value in maintaining friction in the system. If they have to get a hold of a human being at your bank to get it done, there's FOIA-able documentation and it takes more effort than just typing into a console.
Re: Congress
Posted: Wed June 26, 2024 10:38 am
by Bi_3
... and Jamaal Bowman goes down.

Re: Congress
Posted: Wed June 26, 2024 2:59 pm
by tragabigzanda
FUCK ICE
Re: Congress
Posted: Wed June 26, 2024 5:07 pm
by BurtReynolds
You mean the AOC rally appearance didn't turn the tide?