Posted on 01/04/2023 3:40:50 PM PST by FarCenter
...
In two instances the House agreed to choose and subsequently did choose a Speaker by a plurality of votes but confirmed the choice by majority vote. In 1849 the House had been in session 19 days without being able to elect a Speaker, no candidate having received a majority of the votes cast. The voting was viva voce, each Member responding to the call of the roll by naming the candidate for whom he voted. Finally, after the fifty-ninth ballot, the House adopted a resolution declaring that a Speaker could be elected by a plurality. 1 Hinds Sec. 221. In 1856 the House again struggled over the election of a Speaker. Ballots numbering 129 had been taken without any candidate receiving a majority of the votes cast. The House then adopted a resolution permitting the election to be decided by a plurality. 1 Hinds Sec. 222. On both of these occasions, the House ratified the plurality election by a majority vote.
Okay
I can wait
That would be awful! Speaker jefferies would love it though.
Wouldn’t that mean Speaker Jeffries? The dem caucus is a voting block.
I thought they couldn’t do anything before they elect a Speaker.
McCarthy doesn’t have the votes, unless the Dem’s help him out.
If they do, then that’s 100000% proof that they have him and he’ll do whatever Pelosi wants him to.
That being said, it would be awesome if one of the folks not voting for him went to one of the podiums and nominated Pres Trump. It won’t matter and it’ll be fun watching a sizable number of the House, Republican and Democrat, go into spasms.
>>Wouldn’t that mean Speaker Jeffries?
Unlikely. The Republicans would have to come to agreement before the vote.
This whole thing is getting ridiculous. I understand the message, but I really want to get to law making and government oversight
But if the Republicans vote no on the follow up majority vote confirmation then Jeffries would not get it and we will be back to zero again
But if the Republicans vote no on the follow up majority vote confirmation then Jeffries would not get it and we will be back to zero again
Interesting.
Not an analogous situation.
Yeah, I would love to see the political theater for a President Trump nomination.
If McCarthy had morals, he would step aside.
Currently, if it’s a win by plurality, Jeffries has the most votes.
But I don’t think they can change the rules before the House is seated.
Heard the speaker does not actually have to be a member of congress. Was wondering if the speaker could be a bear?
-PJ
Eye patch McCain said that there was terrorists in 1849 too.
Not so many in 1849. But by the 1856 election “Bleeding Kansas”, the guerilla war between slave and anti-slave faction in Kansas, had been underway for some time.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bleeding_Kansas#Summer_of_1856
bump
Thinking something about the woods or being Catholic...🧐.
Caligula made horse a Senator so there could be a precedent here.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.