Wouldn't it be easier to just eject Gaetz on ethics grounds? I mean, Democrats are obviously going to support it; Republicans just need a handful of people to join them. Everybody hates Gaetz anyway, and his kiddy-diddly associations are plenty enough political cover to justify it.
this post was submitted on 10 Oct 2023
146 points (98.0% liked)
politics
25492 readers
2220 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- 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:
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Wouldn’t it be easier to just eject Gaetz on ethics grounds?
I'd bet $100 that will happen as soon as the Speaker issue is resolved. EVERYONE except the most die hard of the Chaos Caucus is tired of his shit. Hell even Lauren Boebert voted to retain McCarthy and avoid this mess.
The problem, from the perspective of the rest of the caucus, is that if any of them are held accountable for anything, then they're all on the chopping block once a more extreme person wants to make headlines.
If there were a conviction, that might move some of them onto the roster of those willing to vote to censure or remove. But for un-adjudicated wrongdoing? They'd just be opening the doors for it to be used against them as well.
Stop trying to ruin my fun, damn it!
Okay, someone explain this to me:
The motion to vacate being made by one person is a rule the House voted on, which means it would take a majority of the House to change. Assuming the Dems have no desire to help the GOP (and why would they?) and assuming the Freedumb Cocks like the power this gives them and so wouldn't change their votes, how could this rule be undone before the next session of Congress? McCarthy already promised Gaetz heaven and all the kingdoms of earth to become Speaker- what could anyone else offer him to make him change his mind?
Basically yeah. The far right and Dems both want it and the general republicans have to appease one of those groups to get a speaker. Funnily Dems probably would’ve been fine with trading it away if it weren’t for McCarthy’s reneging on bipartisan agreements.
Gaetz (and the other who voted McCarthy out) hated McCarthy. If someone like Jim Jordan gets voted in, they’ll be more than happy to get rid of the rule. It’s just high school drama.
There was what, eight GOP reps who voted with the Dems to oust McCarthy? That's what I'm asking: if all the Dems vote against a rule change, and assuming that even if the GOP finally find someone else stupid and craven enough to think he can wrangle their shitshow majority, what incentive is there for Gaetz et al to give up that one-person motion to vacate rule? It essentially makes him kingmaker in the House.
The numbers just aren't there to change it.
Nothing, which is why it won't be on the table. The only way Gaetz keeps power is by being able to blow up the House.
It's political theater and everyone knows it. The Republicans are unlikely to unite their fractured asses enough to pass the change. And the rest of the Republicans don't want to look "soft" or like RINOS so they won't make a deal with Democrats.
The Republicans just need to look functional enough till elections and hope they get a better majority in the house with people they can wrangle into line. Till then it's a crystal clear line of bullshit.
If Chip Roy is in favor of something, my immediate response is to be against it.
If the House was a place full of rational adults, the number of initial proponents wouldn’t matter.
But we seem to have put clowns in charge of the circus and we'll keep watching this shit show instead of having meaningful legislation to help all of our citizens.
Or meaningful legislation to hurt our citizens, considering who's in the majority.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
The rule that allowed Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.) to single-handedly call for a vote ousting Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) has become a key issue for Republicans as they grapple over who should replace him.
Dusty Johnson (R-N.D.), chairman of the “pragmatic” Main Street Caucus, which put out a similar statement expressing skepticism about the motion to vacate earlier in the week.
“The ability for one person to vacate the Speaker of the House will keep a chokehold on this body through 2024,” the Main Street Caucus wrote in a statement Wednesday morning.
Calls to change the rule, though, run up against the demands of hard-line conservatives who pushed McCarthy to adopt the one-person threshold in January as a condition of supporting him for Speaker.
“While I understand some of my colleagues are frustrated over invocation of the Motion to Vacate last week against Speaker Kevin McCarthy — a move I strongly opposed, the rule should remain.
It’s an historic, institutional, & important tool for individual members to exercise their right to represent constituents and not be steamrolled by the establishment,” Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas) posted Friday on X, the platform formerly known as Twitter.
The original article contains 789 words, the summary contains 190 words. Saved 76%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
Had a Motion to Vacate just this morning.