Republicans consider repealing rule that led to McCarthy’s ouster.
House Republicans Consider Changing Rules to Prevent Another Ouster
As House Republicans search for a replacement for Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) as speaker, some GOP lawmakers are exploring the idea of raising the threshold required to make a motion to vacate, in order to avoid a repeat of McCarthy’s removal.
The Race is On: Who Could Replace McCarthy as Speaker?
When McCarthy ran for speaker earlier this year, he made several concessions to gain support from fellow lawmakers. One of these concessions was a rule change that allowed a single member to raise a motion to vacate, triggering a vote on the matter.
Now, some of McCarthy’s closest allies and top Republicans are suggesting that this rule should be repealed, arguing that it hampers effective governance.
“We can’t have a new speaker in place with a completely dysfunctional structure. That’s just wrong and unfair to another speaker,” said Rep. Garrett Graves (R-LA). “Let’s remember that there is a conference rule stating that a motion to vacate cannot be brought without the support of the conference.”
Several members have indicated that this rule could be up for negotiation as they consider potential candidates for the speakership. It is likely that candidates will include their stance on this issue as part of their platform.
“I suppose that will be discussed by those who are running, in an effort to secure votes,” said Rep. Scott Perry (R-PA). “We’ll see how it plays out.”
Rep. Tim Burchett (R-TN), who voted to remove McCarthy, believes that some changes will be reconsidered, including the motion to vacate rule.
Rep. Jodey Arrington (R-TX) sees changing the rules as a “legitimate consideration,” although it is not currently a topic of discussion among Republicans.
“I would need to have a more in-depth conversation about it,” Arrington said when asked about his support for a rules change. “But I believe the rules we have adopted are good. They hold us accountable as a conference, ensuring an open process and enforcing fiscal responsibility.”
The Main Street Caucus, a group of pragmatic Republicans, also supports amending the rules, arguing that it places a ”chokehold” on the speakership.
“Personal politics should never again override the will of 96% of House conservatives,” the caucus stated. “Any candidate for speaker must demonstrate how they will prevent a repeat of what happened on Tuesday.”
House Majority Leader Steve Scalise (R-LA) and Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) have already announced their candidacies for speaker, while other names being considered include House Majority Whip Tom Emmer (R-MN) and Rep. Kevin Hern (R-OK).
Click here to read more from The Washington Examiner.
Hern, when asked about repealing the motion to vacate rule, stated that he had not yet considered it and it would not be a part of his platform.
“If the members want it, that’s fine, but it’s not something I’m actively pushing,” he said.
What are the arguments in favor of raising the threshold required to make a motion to vacate in the House of Representatives?
Ely that a heated debate will ensue as lawmakers weigh the pros and cons of changing the threshold required to make a motion to vacate.
Those in favor of raising the threshold argue that it would prevent hasty and impulsive ousters of the speaker. They believe that a higher threshold would create stability and allow the speaker to govern effectively without the constant threat of removal.
On the other hand, opponents of changing the rule argue that it could limit the power of individual members and stifle dissent within the party. They believe that a lower threshold ensures accountability and gives members a voice in holding the speaker accountable for their actions and decisions.
The debate over changing this rule comes at a critical time for House Republicans. With McCarthy stepping down as speaker, the party is in need of a new leader who can unite the caucus and effectively represent their interests. The prospect of changing the rule adds another layer of complexity to this already challenging task.
Furthermore, the outcome of this debate will have significant implications not only for the future speaker but also for the party as a whole. If the threshold is raised, it could potentially create a more stable and unified party, able to pursue its agenda with greater efficacy. On the other hand, if the threshold remains unchanged, it could foster a more open and democratic environment, allowing for a diversity of opinions and perspectives within the party.
It is clear that the decision to change or maintain the current rule is not one to be taken lightly. House Republicans must carefully consider the potential consequences and ramifications before making a final decision. The future of the party and its ability to effectively govern may hang in the balance.
In the coming weeks, as the race for speaker intensifies, House Republicans will need to navigate these challenging waters. They must balance the need for stability and effective governance with the importance of individual voices and accountability. The path they choose will shape not only the fate of the speakership but also the future trajectory of the Republican party.
" Conservative News Daily does not always share or support the views and opinions expressed here; they are just those of the writer."
*As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases
