490
submitted 10 months ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world

Just four days out from a government shutdown, House Speaker Kevin McCarthy has declared a bipartisan Senate stopgap measure dead on arrival.

Senators, having apparently lost faith in McCarthy’s ability to stave off a shutdown, negotiated a bill late Tuesday night that funds the government until Nov. 17 and includes $12 billion in aid and disaster relief for Ukraine. It’s expected to be voted on by the end of the week before being sent over to the House, and is intended to buy lawmakers more time to hash out a longer-term deal, Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) said.

But, according to Punchbowl News, McCarthy said in a closed-door meeting on Wednesday morning that he wouldn’t take up a bill that includes Ukraine funding but no border security measures. “I don’t see the support in the House,” he reportedly said.

Aid for Ukraine has been one of several sticking points for ultraconservative hardliners in the House who have repeatedly sabotaged McCarthy’s efforts to get spending bills passed.

(page 2) 47 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] ramble81@lemm.ee 7 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

I know the likelyhood of this occurring is low, but wasn’t one of the conditions of his speakership was that anyone in the house (or was it restricted to just republicans?) could recall him. If so, would it be possible for a republican to recall him, get a small handful of republicans to join the democrats to instate a new speaker and then vote on the bipartisan bill?

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 6 points 10 months ago

Qevin is just what Swalwell said he is. Shocking.

[-] photonic_sorcerer@lemmy.dbzer0.com -4 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Can anyone tell me why the democratic minority whip can't find some common ground with moderate republicans in the house and pass this bill?

[-] Eccitaze@yiffit.net 4 points 10 months ago

Ok, so there's a lot going on here.

Democrats are voting no on all the proposals in the House, because they're a divergence from the spending levels McCarthy himself negotiated in May to avoid hitting the debt ceiling. Hard-line Republicans are voting no on the budget proposals from the House and Senate because they're not enough of a divergence and only gives them some of what they asked for (even though what they're already getting is a non-starter in the Democrat-controlled Senate).

McCarthy could present the stopgap bill from the Senate, or a bill that adheres to the previously negotiated spending limits, and they would almost 100% pass with support from moderate Democrats and Republicans overriding the no votes from the freedom caucus and a few progressive Democrats, but McCarthy is afraid to do that because the wing nuts are threatening to oust him from the speakership if he doesn't cave to their demands.

Making matters worse, House Democrats are pissed about McCarthy opening an impeachment inquiry into Biden over baseless allegations, so they have even less desire then normal to accommodate McCarthy in his efforts to renege on the very deal he negotiated less than 5 months ago.

The Democrats have zero responsibility for this mess, and zero desire to rescue a feckless and ineffective speaker from the consequences of his own dumb choices. And make no mistake: the only way this ends is McCarthy growing the balls to tell the wing nuts to get fucked, or the house bypassing him entirely with a discharge petition. The only variable is whether that happens before or after a government shutdown, and it looks like that's going to be after at this point.

[-] bostonbananarama@lemmy.world 4 points 10 months ago

First you'd have to find moderate Republicans in the House, they're a very rare breed that are nearly extinct.

[-] gastationsushi@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago

In short, blame partisan primaries. Bipartisanship is seen as aiding the manifestation of evil here on Earth. And that can cost any GOPer the race, even to a no name challenger.

This holds true even for Biden district Republicans, because their most active voters either subscribe to a cult of Reagan or cult of Trump world view. These cult voters dominate low turnout primaries, even when their overall numbers aren't very large.

We could reform elections and have non partisan primaries or even RCV. But that would sap power away from political parties and cultists. Where is the fun in that?

[-] Lemminary@lemmy.world 0 points 10 months ago

Maybe you didn't mean it this way, but I think it's weird to frame it as if it's the dems who are responsible for this shit. They give the reps an inch and they'll shut down the government because they just decided that they wanted five more inches.

[-] photonic_sorcerer@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 10 months ago

No, I didn't mean it that way, I was asking a question about something I didn't know about.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›
this post was submitted on 27 Sep 2023
490 points (98.4% liked)

politics

18637 readers
3740 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
  2. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  3. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  6. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS