• Nightwingdragon@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    11 months ago

    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.

    • callouscomic@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      11 months ago

      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.

      • Nightwingdragon@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        11 months ago

        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.

        • callouscomic@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          11 months ago

          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.