Why the House of Representatives is in Complete Chaos

SeaBreeze

Endlessly Groovin'
Location
USA
Document (questionnaire) from Freedom Caucas reveals why. http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2...ouse-of-representatives-is-in-complete-chaos/


The House of Representative is in chaos. John Boehner announced his intention to step down as Speaker at the end of the month. There doesn’t appear to be anyone to take his place. The leading candidate, Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy, abruptly withdrew from the race yesterday. Another popular choice, Paul Ryan, says he’s not interested.

What happened? How did we get to this point? One document, produced by the House Freedom Caucus, holds all the answers. Framed as a “questionnaire” the document effectively makes it impossible for any candidate to both: 1) Get elected speaker, and 2) Not send the entire country (and maybe the world) over a cliff.

Why the Freedom Caucus has so much power

The House Freedom Caucus, a relatively new group of about 40 Republicans loosely associated with the Tea Party, has an extraordinary amount of power in this process. Any potential speaker needs the support of 218 Republicans on the floor of the House. There are currently 247 Republicans in the House. That’s a large majority but without the Freedom Caucus, no candidate can get to 218.

What the Freedom Caucus says they want

The Freedom Caucus says they are just fighting for arcane rule changes that will enhance “democracy” in the House. On CNN yesterday, David Brat, a prominent member of the Freedom Caucus outlined his criteria for a new speaker. (You may remember Brat for his surprise victory over Eric Cantor, the man many assumed would replace Boehner as speaker.)

Anyone that ensures a fair process for all sides. That’s what we are all looking for, right… We’ve shown principle. We are waiting for leadership candidates to put in writing moves that ensure you have a democratic process within our own conference. That is what everyone is waiting to see. And it’s got to be in writing, ahead of time for that to be credible.


Sounds perfectly reasonable, right?

What the Freedom Caucus actually wants

Yesterday, Politico published the House Freedom Caucus “questionnaire” which it described as pushing for “House rule changes.” The document does do that. But it also does a lot more. It seeks substantive commitments from the next speaker that would effectively send the entire country into a tailspin.

For example, the document seeks a commitment from the next speaker to tie any increase in the debt ceiling to cuts to Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid.
socialsecurity-638x118.jpg

The United States will reach the debt limit on November 5. If the limit is not raised prior to that point, the United States could default on its obligations. This could have disasterous effects on the economy of the United States and the entire world. In 2013, a Treasury Department report found “default could result in recession comparable to or worse than 2008 financial crisis.”

Cutting Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid is extremely unpopular, even among Republicans. These programs are sacrosanct to most Democratic members of Congress. There is effectively no chance that President Obama or Senate Democrats — both of whom would need to support such legislation — would agree to “structural entitlement reforms” in the next month under these kind of conditions.

The House Freedom Caucus essentially wants to make it impossible for the next speaker to raise the debt ceiling. But that is just the beginning.
The House Freedom Caucus also wants the next speaker to commit to numerous conditions on any agreement to avoid a government shutdown:
budget-638x141.jpg

The government will run out of money on December 11. Unless additional funding is approved before that date, the government will shut down.
The House Freedom Caucus wants the next speaker to commit to not funding the government at all unless President Obama (and Senate Democrats) agree to defund Obamacare, Planned Parenthood and a host of other priorities.

This is essentially the Ted Cruz strategy which prompted at 16-day shutdown in 2013. This would now be enshrined as the official policy of the Speaker Of The House.

The House Freedom Caucus wants the next speaker to commit to oppose any “omnibus” bill that would keep the government running. Rather, funding for each aspect of government could only be approved by separate bills. This would allow the Republicans to attempt to finance certain favored aspects of government (the military), while shuttering ones they view as largely unnecessary (education, health).

Why McCarthy thinks the House might be ungovernable

For McCarthy, the document helps explain why he dropped out of the race. If he doesn’t agree to the demands of the House Freedom Caucus, he cannot secure enough votes to become speaker. But if he does agree to their demands, he will unable to pass legislation that is necessary to avoid disastrous consequences for the country.

McCarthy said that, even if he managed to get elected speaker, he doesn’t see how he would be able to have enough votes to extend the debt ceiling and keep the government open.

Asked by the National Review if he thought the House was governable, McCarthy said, “I don’t know. Sometimes you have to hit rock bottom.”

Why no one wants to be speaker

Top Republicans are calling Paul Ryan and begging him to be speaker. But thus far, he hasn’t agreed to run. None of the candidates currently running appear to have substantial support.

The agenda of the House Freedom Caucus makes a difficult job effectively impossible. Agreeing to their demands means presiding over a period of unprecedented dysfunction in the United States.

Even if a candidate was able to become speaker without formally agreeing to the Freedom Caucus’ most extreme requirements, one would still have to deal with the group — and a larger group of House Republicans sympathetic to them — in order to get anything done.

This is why Boehner wanted out and why no one really wants to take his place.
 

I had never heard of that. No wonder they are refusing to be Speaker.

On the other hand, why does everything need to be passed without some such scrutiny of the budget limits and even some other ways to make sure the US pays its bills timely without constantly increasing the debt limit. Surely there are some expenses that we could do without. Some that we could modify to lower their costs. Something that would require the authors of these new expenses to actually do a balance the books exam to avoid increasing our debts. Tax improvements that would end the moving of wealth to over seas areas. Why is half the population not paying taxes as some reports claim. I still pay taxes. I am unemployed and well into age at 82. I think all should at least pay some minimum tax just for living here. A reminder of where their benefits will be coming from.

Not justifying debts by our Congressmen is not acceptable in any money system. We do have to justify our home expenses or lose our homes if not careful. That does not mean ownership as rentals also need care with what ever income we might have. Same with the government as they only have our tax incomes to play with. Debt is debt and debt will take away or freedoms and good will efforts. Political party has nothing to do with this. It is for all of us to take care of and over time eliminate the debt we have.
 
Last edited:
Sorry Bob, I can't get into debating about the debt that was left to us by the last administration anymore, there's too many threads and posts here already giving both sides...gets too tiresome month after month.

:beatdeadhorse:
 

Sorry Bob, I can't get into debating about the debt that was left to us by the last administration anymore, there's too many threads and posts here already giving both sides...gets too tiresome month after month.

:beatdeadhorse:

It is not something to debate. The debts we have today are many trillions higher than before the current government took over. No debate about it as it does exist and should not. Why can't the mission of a balanced budget be kept by our Congress as it should. Clinton tried and brought the debt down a ways while he was in office. Bush was holding good until the last two years when the Democrats took over Congress. Not a debate item. It is a fact.

I don't expect to debate as I will always use facts and post charts and data to support. As long a folks post how well a political group is doing, that opens the forum for rebuttals from other folks that do not agree.
 
So you then hate data and charts Jim? That is too bad as that is how many like to converse. Look to the stats given for business success or failure. Data and charts are used.
 
Yeah..... boring not to mention repetitive.. Could you please get some new material??

Certainly I can and have done so just recently. The items about Bernie Sanders and his Democratic Socialism is something that the US should never play with as it is the same ideas that have destroyed many other countries and put them into poverty.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_socialism

Democratic socialism is a political ideology advocating a democratic political system alongside a socialist economic system, involving a combination of political democracy with social ownership of the means of production. Sometimes used synonymously with "socialism", the adjective "democratic" is added to distinguish itself from the Marxist–Leninist brand of socialism.[SUP][1]
...........................................

The US is a Republic and does not have the authority to do social ownership of the means of production.

..........................................
[/SUP]Democratic socialism rejects the social democratic view of reform through state intervention within capitalism, seeing capitalism as inherently incompatible with the democratic values of freedom, equality and solidarity. Democratic socialists believe that the issues inherent to capitalism can only be solved by transitioning from capitalism to socialism, by superseding private property with some form of social ownership, with any attempt to address the economic contradictions of capitalism through reforms only likely to generate more problems elsewhere in the capitalist economy.[SUP][4][/SUP][SUP][5]
.....................................[/SUP]

Well you asked for new topic and I borrowed the topic and added some pretty scary comments about that type of government.
 
Another idea to think about is Social Democracy.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_democracy

Social democracy is a political ideology that supports economic and social interventions to promote social justice within the framework of a capitalist economy, and a policy regime involving welfare state provisions, collective bargaining arrangements, regulation of the economy in the general interest, redistribution of income and wealth, and a commitment to representative democracy.[SUP][1][/SUP][SUP][2][/SUP][SUP][3][/SUP] Social democracy aims to create the conditions for capitalism to lead to greater egalitarian, democratic and solidaristic outcomes.[SUP][4][/SUP] "Social democracy" is often used in this manner to refer to the social policies prominent in Western and Northern Europe - particularly in reference to the Nordic countries - during the latter half of the 20th century.[SUP][5][/SUP][SUP][6][/SUP] Alternatively, social democracy is defined as a political ideology that advocates a peaceful, evolutionary transition of society from capitalism to socialism using established political processes.[SUP][7]
[/SUP]......................

This one feature is enough to turn me away. We have a Republic and that is quite good as in a Republic we can do just what you think we should do, and that is to be fair to the poor, sick, unemployed, and whatever and never have to call it socialist at all. We got by for over 200 years with no socialist propaganda about their ways are best. A couple of efforts and they did fall apart. The US communist party was once vocal but not it has little to no support. We do not need to be socialist to be kind and protective.
 
Apparently you did not even read those posts I put up. Both end up with the plan to change the US into a far far left socialist type government and all the Constitutional ways taken away for failures of government. Our 200 plus years of successful government tossed to join the undemocratic and not Republic ways of government. Pretty darned scary to those that believe in success over personal loss of freedoms and life styles.
 
I don't see our government as being particularly successful Bob... Not when 1% of the population has more then 50% of the wealth. Not when people's incomes have consistently declined in the last 30 years... and the middle class is disappearing. I heard today that half of all Americans could not pay an unexpected $400 bill without going into debt or selling something. So my question to you is "successful for WHO?" Certainly not for everyone.. but definitely for the wealthy and big corporations.. and that is what Democratic Socialism intends to fix. What "freedoms" are you afraid of losing under that system? I say it increases FREEDOM.... by giving EVERYONE a chance to succeed.. not just a few.
 
Well, to your misunderstood 'facts' about the US economy I say this to you and any others. If you really do not want to live in the way the US is supposed to live by our Constitution, there are not gates to keep those folks tied to the US. Why not just move to one of those better places in Europe where things are not so rosey at all. They are known to be poorer than here in the new continent. They don't have the freedom of choosing how they want to live and other common things we accept. Why are so many of those in socialist countries doing their best to get into the US. Certainly not because they want to be a poor as you seem to think we are.

Pretty scary for one of the best countries in the world to be considered unworthy of the Constitution that brought us here over 200 years successfully. How often do the countries in Europe change governments. Pretty often it seems.
 
I don't see our government as being particularly successful

It is becoming quite obvious that Washington is becoming a government "Of, By, and For" the wealthy and the special interests. If the truth were known, there are probably about 1,000 of the very wealthy and corporations that hold the Real Power in our government....via their lavish campaign donations, etc. The Only time most of these politicians express any Real concern for the average citizen is in the weeks/months leading up to the elections. Once in office, they go right back to pandering to their wealth "Masters".

I would dearly love to see term limits in the Congress, and serious campaign finance reform that limits the amount of funding any individual, corporation, or PAC can throw into the mix. However, with a body of politicians who have become Addicted to money, and a government that allows something like Citizens United to become law, this does not bode well for the vast majority of our people. The continuing stagnation/decline of our Middle Class is an issue that needs serious consideration....as history shows that No nation has prospered, or survived, without a healthy Middle Class.
 
Well, to your misunderstood 'facts' about the US economy I say this to you and any others. If you really do not want to live in the way the US is supposed to live by our Constitution, there are not gates to keep those folks tied to the US. Why not just move to one of those better places in Europe where things are not so rosey at all. They are known to be poorer than here in the new continent. They don't have the freedom of choosing how they want to live and other common things we accept. Why are so many of those in socialist countries doing their best to get into the US. Certainly not because they want to be a poor as you seem to think we are.

Pretty scary for one of the best countries in the world to be considered unworthy of the Constitution that brought us here over 200 years successfully. How often do the countries in Europe change governments. Pretty often it seems.


Very typical of folks like you Bob.... When you run out of arguments defending a outdated Constitution and biased legislation... THEN it's time to bring out the old "IF YOU DON'T LIKE IT THEN LEAVE" schtick... BS to that.. We need people who want to make this country better for EVERYONE.. not people who want to maintain the status quo because of a fear of change..
 
I don't see our government as being particularly successful

It is becoming quite obvious that Washington is becoming a government "Of, By, and For" the wealthy and the special interests. If the truth were known, there are probably about 1,000 of the very wealthy and corporations that hold the Real Power in our government....via their lavish campaign donations, etc. The Only time most of these politicians express any Real concern for the average citizen is in the weeks/months leading up to the elections. Once in office, they go right back to pandering to their wealth "Masters".

I would dearly love to see term limits in the Congress, and serious campaign finance reform that limits the amount of funding any individual, corporation, or PAC can throw into the mix. However, with a body of politicians who have become Addicted to money, and a government that allows something like Citizens United to become law, this does not bode well for the vast majority of our people. The continuing stagnation/decline of our Middle Class is an issue that needs serious consideration....as history shows that No nation has prospered, or survived, without a healthy Middle Class.

This is very true.. and America will continue to decline if something isn't done about the imbalance of power and income and opportunity inequality.
 
We do have the vote and we should use that to rid the Congress of those that don't do their jobs per the not outdated Constitution. Why should we change what has worked so well till just recent years, starting in about 1970 when the Congress no longer follows the rules and forces a balanced budget. We no longer have a fair tax system as it allows those with big money to hide their money overseas so they do not pay taxes. That is one thing needing fixed but somehow, the Congress is not doing so. We have the vote and should vote out the ones that don't follow good business guidelines.

You ignored my comments as you did not answer why so many countries in Europe are broke, barely keeping their countries together, and so many of their people want to come to the US for a better life. Just too much for you to respond too.
 
so many countries in Europe are broke, barely keeping their countries together, and so many of their people want to come to the US for a better life.

Yes, people have always migrated here and they still do. Rather interesting (and ironic) considering how much time some members living in other countries spend on this forum bashing the US.
 


Back
Top