Conference fails to approve procedural motion to take up defense spending bill as government shutdown looms

The House Republican speaker, Kevin McCarthy, was dealt his second humiliating defeat of the week on Thursday, when his conference again failed to approve a procedural motion as members continued to clash over government spending levels with just days left to avert a federal shutdown.

With no clear path forward in Republicans’ negotiations, the House concluded its work on Thursday without any stated plan to reconvene on Friday.

“Discussions related to [fiscal year 2024] appropriations are ongoing,” Congressman Tom Emmer, the House Republican whip, said in a statement. “Members are advised that ample notice will be given ahead of any potential votes tomorrow or this weekend.”

  • flossdaily@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    278
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    McCarthy: “hard-right Republicans want to burn the whole place down!”

    Moderate Democrats: “so you’ll work with us instead, to pass legislation that keeps the lights on, and addresses some of the problems we both agree exist?”

    McCarthy: “No. Fuck you. Die in a fire.”

    • TechyDad@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      86
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Exactly. The path forward is clear. Work with moderate Democrats to craft a bipartisan spending bill that most Democrats and Republicans can agree upon. Well either side get everything it wants? No, but that’s how compromise works.

      Of course the Freedom Caucus will be angry, but let’s face it - they’re always angry. (Hulk Smash makes for a good movie, but not for good politics.) If McCarthy works with Democrats and the saner Republicans, though, the power of the Freedom Caucus will be blunted. They can file to remove McCarthy all they like, but part of the deal with the Democrats could be that they’ll vote to keep McCarthy.

      Instead, McCarthy will complain while hoping that the Freedom Caucus members suddenly become reasonable.

      • Heisme@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        36
        ·
        1 year ago

        In an insane world it’s the sane that seem insane. This is the most logical solution to all of McCarthy’s problems but it will seem so crazy to him that he won’t go for it. Battle seat Republicans are already talking about working with Democrats to solve this problem. All of this use to be a nonissue because surprise surprise people in a long far away time once voted over party lines to get shit done, just as you said.

        • nilloc@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          10
          ·
          1 year ago

          That was before the Republican Party adopted “owning the libs” as their only platform item.

          If McCarthy does anything with any Dems, it doesn’t seem crazy to him, he just knows it’ll result in a primary battle where his opponents will roll out his record of working with the enemy (which they’ve convinced a large portion of their voters, are pedos and election thieves).

    • Beetschnapps@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      26
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Pretty much.

      Whine as he may. The effect is still the same.

      Still all one big family even if some of them say the quiet parts out loud.

    • 520@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      1 year ago

      He is completely beholden to the far right. The approval votes by the far right were what got him just about enough votes to get him into Speakership. If they turn on him, he’ll be kicked out for sure.

      • Frozengyro@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Not if he can get Democrat votes. He can work with them and gain their votes to keep his position.

        • 520@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          If he tries that, even the moderate republicans will pull their votes for him.

          Also, even if that somehow did work, the Democrats will likely then pull their votes because they want a Democrat as speaker. The Democrats might not be Republicans, but they sure as hell are not above this kind of partisanship

      • Blackbeard@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        26
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Not if the Dems agree to vote to keep him. He could play this like an intelligent human being and still keep his job, so long as he’s willing to weather a bit of right-wing media blowback for the next few months. He just has to strike a bipartisan deal, like he’s supposed to.

        • knotthatone@lemmy.one
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          12
          ·
          1 year ago

          Not if the Dems agree to vote to keep him

          That seems a tall order given his long history of biting the Dem’s hands every time they reach out. This is a problem of his party’s own making and stems from not honoring their earlier agreements around the debt ceiling.

          Besides, they can’t agree to something he hasn’t (and won’t) ask for.

          • Blackbeard@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            1 year ago

            That seems a tall order given his long history of biting the Dem’s hands every time they reach out. This is a problem of his party’s own making and stems from not honoring their earlier agreements around the debt ceiling.

            I don’t disagree. I’m just saying Dems could offer to vote to keep him in his position in exchange for a bipartisan deal. That doesn’t mean they capitulate completely, just that they offer him something he wants (his job) in exchange for something they want.

            Besides, they can’t agree to something he hasn’t (and won’t) ask for.

            I didn’t say they’ve asked or are responsible for agreeing to anything, please follow the whole thread. I was responding to someone who said he’d lose his job if he worked with Dems on a bipartisan deal. He wouldn’t if they threw him the bone of a vote to keep him if his caucus moves to vacate him as Speaker. I’m not commenting on the likelihood of anything like this happening, simply that it’s possible.

        • tankplanker@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          1 year ago

          Working with the Dems will make his next Primary difficult, he hasn’t got that long before that comes around again. This is what he, and a lot of the more moderate republicans are really scared of, being cut off from the grift by their own party.

          • Blackbeard@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            You’re right, but it’s certainly a calculation that will change as pressure mounts. Is the political cost of working on a bipartisan compromise bigger than the cost of a shutdown he’ll be blamed for? Right now, maybe not. Over time? It might very well get there. It’s a lose-lose proposition at the moment, he just has to decide which loss he’s more afraid of.

          • candybrie@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            To have a functioning government. There’s 0 chance there will be a democratic speaker. There’s a pretty good chance nothing works, and normal people don’t get paid for weeks or months if bipartisanship is out.

              • candybrie@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                The choices are the status quo or worse. There is no option for better that they’re rejecting by using bipartisanship to pass a clean CR.

                  • candybrie@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    3
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    And how does not making a deal with McCarthy to pass a clean CR help with that exactly?

                  • Blackbeard@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    3
                    arrow-down
                    2
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    You want to look like an unhinged melodramatic who shouldn’t be taken seriously?

                    Because statements like that are how you look like an unhinged melodramatic who shouldn’t be taken seriously.

    • Buelldozer@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Moderate Democrats: “so you’ll work with us instead, to pass legislation that keeps the lights on, and addresses some of the problems we both agree exist?”

      Uhhh, isn’t that kind of what McCarthy actually did? He worked closely with President Biden to put this budget together and it seems to be a big reason why the Freedom Caucus morons are pitching a fit.

      • flossdaily@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Not at all. McCarthy got the deal he thought he could sell to his team.

        McCarthy working with the Democrats in Congress would mean getting a deal way more Democrat friendly, and forgetting about even trying to appease the freedom Caucus.