It is a monumental example of short sightedness by EVERYONE

[Alpeduez21]

that 6-20 people can shut down a third of the US gov't.

Simply due to the fact that someone isn't holding a wooden mallet our country is exemplified as a total charlie foxtrot (CF).

The rule should be the old congress shall remain in place until the new one is up and running. Simple. If democrats were going to be in charge until a new speaker was selected a new speaker would've been selected toot sweet.

[bucolic_frolic]

1. That gets into incentives to prevent transfer of power

A quagmire.

[Alpeduez21]

3. any one can shit on an idea

very few have solutions.

I don't know what the solution is but it is a really bad idea to have the capabilities of congress so easily thwarted.

[D_Master81]

15. Republicans wouldn't go along with Dems

In theory yes it could happen but if the GOP is coming into power there is nothing the democrats can do to stop them if they just elect a leader. We’re acting like this is a difficult process but it’s not. This hasn’t happened in over a century and a half.

[Bayard]

2. Or, maybe just the last Speaker should remain in place

Hilarity would ensue.

[Alpeduez21]

4. ok, yes. He/ or she could swear in new members

and generally keep the wheels of gov't turning until the new one is in place.

[Midnight Writer]

6. That makes sense.

[Caliman73]

5. Short sightedness?

This has happened maybe 3 times in the history of the United States... I am sure the each time it happened, tweaks to the existing rules were made to try to prevent it from happening again. That is how things usually work. There is no way to realistically prevent something like this from happening without other unintended negative consequences.

Perhaps some perspective on how ostensibly democratic institutions are constructed? There are always risks when you have the need of some kind of consensus building. The rules of democratic institutions are typically created under the assumption that everyone will at some point, operate in good faith. This is the problem that we are facing here. The Republican Party has allowed itself to be captured by extremists who are not operating in good faith, but seek power at any cost.

The actual problem is that we have a large percentage of the American electorate that doesn't understand or pay attention to what the representatives they elect are doing, AND/OR they approve of their actions.

I know this is my own Liberal mentality and bias, but I think that if people were better informed and interested in history and politics, that Conservatism would be a fringe idea. Instead of knowing all the drama from the latest game show, or all the stats from the last football game, or which celebrities are feuding, people might understand that lowering taxes on the wealthiest people leads to either shifting the burden of society onto the rest of us, or to programs that are necessary to safeguard people's lives being cut or severely crippled.

That is why Benjamin Franklin, when asked "Well Doctor what have we got a republic or a monarchy?" He replied, "A Republic, if you can keep it" The emphasis should be on the YOU. The beginning of the Constitution says, WE THE PEOPLE, not "We the House, or The Senate, or The Government. We elect people to represent us and work out policy, but we cannot simply act indifferent or choose foolishly (people like Boebert, Greene, Gosar, Biggs, Gaetz, and Santos have NO business being an any position of power). It is not simply up to the elected to make everything work. We have to be involved.

[Hermit-The-Prog]

7. Might want to do a recount...

https://history.house.gov/People/Office/Speakers-Multiple-Ballots/

[Caliman73]

8. Okay. I stand corrected.

14 times and our constitutional republic did not crumble, and a Speaker of the House was elected.

Point is that the rules are written in good faith and with flexibility in mind. What the Republicans are doing today is not, as they argue, just plain old "messy democracy". Republicans are trying to bake extremism and instability into the process. They have given in to extremists and are paying the price.

It is still on us as the voters who send them to represent us, to correct the situation and send better people.

[Hermit-The-Prog]

9. Your point is a good one, I was just picking the one nit. :)

[Caliman73]

14. No worries...

I value the most accurate information possible. I try to research a question before I answer, but cannot always do so. I had read somewhere that SOH votes going past the first ballot were pretty rare.

[ITAL]

13. Well, I guess one could say only four times in history

For those that took longer than this.

Five of the contested Speaker votes were still finished on the second or third ballot, fairly painlessly. And one could almost throw out the 1793 and 1799 ones because that was before the Speaker had much power (Henry Clay really invented the Speakership as we think of today and came a few years later).

Considering this is the 118th Congress, we've really only been in true "contested" Speakerships on numerous ballots nine times. That's not too terrible.

[Renew Deal]

10. Isn't it a sixth of the government?

Half of a third

[Alpeduez21]

11. Maybe you know of a scenario where laws get passed

w/o the house. I don't. Yes the Senate does things independently from the House but there are duties of the House independent from the Senate. The legislative branch is ineffective w/o half of it working.

[Caliman73]

16. True. However...

The current thinking is such...

The House is basically worthless with Republicans in charge. They have no viable legislative agenda. The Continuing Budget Resolution was passed by Congress prior to Republicans taking over and all spending and policy is covered until at least September of this year.

The major concern is if there is some sort of emergency that requires legislation and immediate authorization, which again, with Republicans in charge of the House, was not going to go easy anyway. Imagine that COVID flares up again really badly. What do you think a House with Greene, Boebert, and a spineless coward like McCarthy are going to do regarding any legislation to meet that challenge?

We have the Debt Ceiling, which again, with the idiots in charge of the House, is going to be a game of chicken, or likely, the Republicans driving us straight into the other car or off the cliff. What is a few days, weeks, or even a month or two without a gaveled in House going to cost the country?

This situation is more an embarrassment of government in the US in general but mostly of the Republican Party, than anything catastrophic.

As I said earlier, the worse problem is the continued direction of the Republican Party, and the fact that they continue to be viable in elections because half (well, likely about 27% to 30% ) of the country is stupid enough to keep electing them.

[Hav]

12. Technically, it's not the 6-20

Those 6 to 20 aren't enough to prevent the formation of a majority. It's these holdouts + the minority.
But I agree with the point that this power vacuum is a flaw in the system. The old leadership should end with voting in the new leadership for the House to remain operational as best as possible.

[Genki Hikari]

17. Democrats are not responsible for the r party being a mess

The r thugs are.

No one else.

It's stupid to support fascists trying to destroy our country and government. Democratic leadership understands this, full well.

It's time for the kumbaya reality deniers to get on board with that, too.

[Hav]

18. I have no clue with who you are arguing

because nothing you said has anything to do with my post.