Democracy at work in House

 SOME MEMBERS WANT RULES THAT ALLOW FOR DEBATE AND GUARANTEES BEFORE VOTING FOR MCCARTHY

MAY HAVE DOOMED SPEAKERSHIP WITH THREATS

For the first time in 100 years the speaker of the House has failed to win the necessary votes on the first ballot. While many claim that this is a sign of dysfunction, it is actually just democracy at work. It also magnifies a lack of trust by some in the direction that the House will take in the next session.

So, today after some discussion they will try again. Maybe they will be reassured of their concerns, it seems they want these assurances in writing. While McCarthy has support of a broad range of members it is now possible that an alternative is going to prevail. It seems that some would prefer Jim Jordan as Speaker, he has proven his determination and also knows the issues that many members are concerned about. We will see later today.

Actually the House will survive even if there is no speaker for some time. It of course would stop all business in the House and we can surely survive that development. We can all survive without new spending and new legislation, something that is not in short supply.

Many members have complained for years that the House rules make the speaker the dictator of the House. Rather than the speaker doing the will of the representatives, who should in fact have the ability to represent their districts rather than be servants of the speaker who can be influenced by others. If you have influence over this one representative you indeed have eliminated the power of the other members. The speaker has enormous power to control the direction and also to pressure and intimidate other members with many sticks and carrots.

One such carrot is earmarks, which were banned for 10 years and are now back. It is in fact legalized bribery and opens the rules for extortion. Members can be promised money for projects in their districts and members can refuse to support some things unless they get such earmarks. It is a corrupt practice that many advocate because it gives the leadership much power to get members to vote for their favored legislation. It should be done away with permanently.

The other stick and carrot, one that McCarthy used yesterday was to threaten to withhold committee assignments to members who do not cooperate. These assignments can also be used as trading leverage to get cooperation. I think it would be better for the house member's to vote on committee leaders, rather than it being used again as a form of bribery or extortion. Some of these rules are the rules that some members want assurances about.

This is the House of Representatives, all members should have equal ability to represent their districts in a way that they feel is in the best interest of their voters. Such a system would surely be slower and more chaotic. There is very little that needs to be done in a hurry. We are constantly being subjected to the narrative that all these votes need to be made quickly, without debate and very likely without any scrutiny of what they are voting on. Most members never read or understand what is in much of this legislation, thousands of pages of legalese, all with the intended motive to make the consequences harder to foresee. Debate and scrutiny should be months not hours. That would be in the best interest of the nation, not just special interests.