Posted on 09/30/2013 3:03:56 PM PDT by Tailgunner Joe
Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) has essentially taken the House speakership from John Boehner during the fight over federal spending, Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) charged Monday.
"It's pretty clear that this whole episode is being driven by the hard-right, extreme, Tea Party elements of the Republican Party, and we're seeing that play out in the House, where Sen. Cruz is essentially running the show," Van Hollen said during a breakfast sponsored by The Christian Science Monitor in Washington.
"If Speaker Boehner doesn't want to assert his leadership," he added, "then he should go ahead and turn the gavel over to Speaker Cruz, because that's what we're seeing in the House."
Cruz has been the public face of the campaign to scale back President Obama's healthcare law as part of stopgap legislation to fund the government beyond Monday. The Tea Party favorite spoke for more than 21 hours on the Senate floor last week, urging Republicans to stand firm against ObamaCare funding.
Boehner and other GOP leaders had initially rejected that strategy, pushing a continuing resolution (CR) that didn't condition the spending extension on the inclusion of ObamaCare provisions. They were forced to pull their bill, however, in the face of opposition from House conservatives who agree with Cruz.
What followed was a game of legislative ping-pong between the House and Senate that has left the government on the brink of a shutdown.
Boehner and GOP leaders first passed a CR that defunded ObamaCare; Senate Democrats stripped the health provisions and returned the "clean" bill to Boehner. House Republicans then amended the proposal with two attachments: one to delay ObamaCare for a year, and another to eliminate a tax on medical devices that's helping to fund the law.
The amended measure passed in the wee hours Sunday morning, sending the bill back to the Senate, where Democrats are expected Monday to quickly strip the healthcare provisions once more and return yet another "clean" proposal to the House.
If the chambers fail to reach a deal by midnight, large portions of the government would shut down.
The Senate's likely maneuver Monday confronts Boehner with the same dilemma he faced just three days ago: either pass a clean CR with the help of Democrats and face a near-certain revolt from Tea Party-backed conservatives, or attach another round of GOP amendments and send the bill back to the Senate, likely triggering a shutdown.
The GOP conference is planning to meet at 2 p.m. Monday to discuss their strategy.
Democratic leaders have scheduled their own meeting at 2:30 p.m.
Van Hollen said Monday that, although a clean CR would lose conservatives insistent on the ObamaCare provisions, Boehner would pick up enough Democratic support to pass a clean bill should he bring it to the floor. A number of Democrats, including leaders like Reps. Steny Hoyer (Md.) and Xavier Becerra (Calif.), had said earlier in the month that they couldn't support any CR that includes sequestration.
"I can't speak for everybody," Van Hollen said, "but I can confidently predict that if you put that on the floor of the House, it would, in fact, pass today. All the Speaker has to do is try. … But he refuses to do it because he knows it will pass."
Van Hollen also expressed support for a much shorter CR — a week, say — to prevent a shutdown Tuesday.
Republicans, meanwhile, have hammered Obama for what they say is the president's failure to negotiate with Congress on reaching a deal.
"No one's shutting down the government except the president," Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) said Saturday. "The president said he won't negotiate."
The dynamics have put Boehner in the awkward position of calling on Obama to enter the discussion for the sake of a deal while simultaneously refusing to negotiate with the president for fear of a backlash from his right-most flank.
Facing pressure from conservatives in January, Boehner told his conference that he would abandon one-on-one negotiations with Obama on the budget — a vow he amplified earlier this month. The Speaker suggested Obama should negotiate instead with Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.).
Van Hollen acknowledged that Boehner is in a tough spot. But he also declined to give the Speaker a pass if the government shuts down, accusing Boehner of "feeding the beast" by catering to conservatives at the expense of economic stability.
"It is time for the Speaker to make a decision," Van Hollen said. "Either he should step aside for Sen. Cruz, or he should exert some leadership."
I really like the sound of that!
They did that. All weekend.
Reid wouldn’t touch the bills.
Uh, Cruz isn’t qualified to be Speaker....
They passed a continuing resolution for all departments at the same time, with the exception that they defunded Obamacare unless it was delayed one year.
The only departments that they passed individual appropriations for were the military and parts of the state dept. They passed an appropriation for the military that would keep them paid in the event of a government shutdown. The Senate passed that one and Obama signed it.
I'm not sure what happened with the state dept. It probably went through as well.
But I think they should split the continuing resolution up by department. And pass one department at a time. Reid probably wouldn't touch them, because it's not the blanket no strings continuing resolution he wants. But primary responsibility for spending is with the House and the House needs to excert it's authority.
Michelle Bachmann was on Hannity today and that’s what she said.
Don’t shoot the messenger. Lol
Explain
That is true. But many who live there are from somewhere else - more so as you get closer to DC and Baltimore. The counties that have more native Marylanders are less whacky, some even conservative. Case in point:
Andrew P. Harris (R), 1st Congressional District, MD, includes Cecil, Kent, Queen Anne’s, Caroline, Talbot, Dorchester, Wicomico, Worcester & Somerset counties & parts of Baltimore, Carroll & Harford counties. Most of those counties are well away from DC and Baltimore (most on the eastern shore). Even the portion in Baltimore county is the northern part, the most distant from Baltimore. Most of the counties in the district also went Republican in the last presidential election.
http://www.mdp.state.md.us/pdf/redistricting/2010maps/cong/dist_1.pdf
Could you expound upon that?
You have to be member of the HOR
“If Speaker Boehner doesn’t want to assert his leadership,” he added, “then he should go ahead and turn the gavel over to Speaker Cruz, because that’s what we’re seeing in the House.”
That is the best idea I’ve ever heard from a DemonRat!!
That’s my new Representative (sigh) . . .
Maryland “Freak State” PING!
Duhhh ... I’m getting too old.
You can practically see the spray of foam and spit as the author says this.
Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.)referred to Ted Cruz as a jest. However, if enough people like the sound of that, it may just well become a reality
The conservative Republicans have Boehner grabbed by his balls. He either does the right thing or he will no longer be speaker.
That is not true.
You probably also think you have to be a licensed attorney to be a U.S. Supreme Court Justice.
Setting aside the fact that Van Hollen is full of bovine feces, if Cruz is become the leader, it’s because he’s the only one showing any leadership.
That is actually incorrect. While no Speaker has ever been chosen from outside the current membership, there is no rule or law prohibiting it.
I do not think that you have to be an attorney to be supreme court justice, but thanks for assuming.
Before you mock someone else, get your ducks in a row.
Of course you have to be a member of the House to be Speaker.
But, good luck with that challenge constitutionally.
You won’t have precedent nor founders’ intent on your side.
And, outside the Constitution, those are two of the highest tenants when determining constitutionality.
And besides the words of the founders themselves, common sense must prevail.
Why do you think the founders didn’t list qualifications for the Speaker of the House specifically? Because they were already listed under the qualifications for MEMBERS. It’s not rocket science. Do you really think the founders were cool with the House of Reps putting, say, a 17 year old non citizen as speaker of the House? Because that’s exactly what your point implies. And if you DO think that, then do you really think that the qualifications for Representatives were important enough to list in the constitution, but their leader, who holds MUCH power, was so important that the founders didn’t bother with qualifications?
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.