If it’s strictly for the purposes of getting a vote on aid for Israel and Ukraine, sure.
But beyond that, I’m not a fan of any Democrats bailing the GOP out from a mess that they themselves created again. All it does is reinforce the GOP policy that they can continue to blame Democrats from their own problems while fully expecting those same Democrats to bail them out again when another one of their stupid ideas blows up in their face, and acting as if the sole purpose of the Democrat party is to be dusted off whenever they need to save Republicans from themselves.
In my mind, any bipartisan legislation that can command a majority of both the Republican and Democratic caucuses ought to be able to advance while SpongeBob … Er… Patrick is the temporary Speaker.
Now, is there a way to codify that in the House Rules?
But one thing that should be codified into House rules:
Nobody can introduce a motion to vacate without also putting forth a nominee to replace them. The house would then be voting to either keep the existing speaker or install a new one. (I would assume that members of the opposing party would just vote “present”). This way, the house is never without a speaker.
And they aren’t allowed to leave the chamber until they have a new speaker.
Also, if they don’t pass a budget on time, then enact last year’s budget plus 3%, and require that any budget changes cannot take effect until next budget.
It’s basically how things used to be until about the 70s. They changed it to force themselves to reconsider overspending every year. Yet our deficits have ballooned and in those roughly 50 years they have passed budgets on time a whopping 4 times.
I believe the temporary speaker can be voted as temporary speaker, which means he has much more flexibility on what can be voted on, but he is still the temporary speaker.
If it’s strictly for the purposes of getting a vote on aid for Israel and Ukraine, sure.
But beyond that, I’m not a fan of any Democrats bailing the GOP out from a mess that they themselves created again. All it does is reinforce the GOP policy that they can continue to blame Democrats from their own problems while fully expecting those same Democrats to bail them out again when another one of their stupid ideas blows up in their face, and acting as if the sole purpose of the Democrat party is to be dusted off whenever they need to save Republicans from themselves.
In my mind, any bipartisan legislation that can command a majority of both the Republican and Democratic caucuses ought to be able to advance while SpongeBob … Er… Patrick is the temporary Speaker.
Now, is there a way to codify that in the House Rules?
Probably not.
But one thing that should be codified into House rules:
Nobody can introduce a motion to vacate without also putting forth a nominee to replace them. The house would then be voting to either keep the existing speaker or install a new one. (I would assume that members of the opposing party would just vote “present”). This way, the house is never without a speaker.
And they aren’t allowed to leave the chamber until they have a new speaker.
Also, if they don’t pass a budget on time, then enact last year’s budget plus 3%, and require that any budget changes cannot take effect until next budget.
I’d actually set this as the default.
The Budget just keeps rolling over plus an adjustment for inflation. The house only would have to vote if any changes are to be made.
It’s basically how things used to be until about the 70s. They changed it to force themselves to reconsider overspending every year. Yet our deficits have ballooned and in those roughly 50 years they have passed budgets on time a whopping 4 times.
Ah yes, the Bismarck solution.
I believe the temporary speaker can be voted as temporary speaker, which means he has much more flexibility on what can be voted on, but he is still the temporary speaker.
Yes, it is weird, but we’re in weird territory.