Deal? Ryan Says He'll Delay "Reforms" of Motion-to-Vacate Rule; House Freedom Caucus Asks for Protection Against Attacks From Establishment Groups Like the Chamber of Congress

That last part is a disappointment to me. I don't like trading general substance for private personal protection. But, whatever. Politics makes whores of us all.

Allah says he sees horse-trades in the works here.

The horses seem to involve concessions to Ryan on making the motion-to-vacate harder to execute, in exchange, I guess, for reforms of House rules to give dissident members more of a voice.

The Wisconsin Republican, now the presumptive next speaker of the House, delivered the message to Ohio Rep. Jim Jordan, the chairman of the Freedom Caucus, according to multiple sources familiar with the discussion. Possible changes to the so-called "motion to vacate" will now come as part of a larger discussion of reworking internal party and House rules. Should he become House speaker, Ryan will set a deadline by which the House Republican Conference will change chamber and party rules.

It has long been a complaint of the Freedom Caucus that the House under Boehner was far too dictatorial, with too much power centralized in the Speakership; dissident members could never get their amendments even voted on. I imagine the "reworking of internal party and House rules" involves some devolution of power out away from leadership.

Meanwhile, House conservatives are tired of being attacked by big-money Establishment groups like the Democrat front group the Chamber of Congress, and the Freedom Caucus pitched some kind of nonaggresion pact.

Hours before many of them threw their support behind Rep. Paul Ryan’s bid for speaker, House conservatives pushed him on one of their own proposals: to defend them from attacks by big-money establishment groups.

During a private meeting, the House Freedom Caucus -- which announced Wednesday evening it would support Ryan by a super majority, giving him enough votes to be speaker-- discussed a proposal that calls for the next speaker to step in when well-funded groups from the centrist or right-wing of the party spend money attacking sitting members of Congress.

Members of group said they had discussed the proposal -- along with other issues — with all candidates for speaker, but Ryan in particular, because of his emphasis on party unity. In theory, the proposal would protect not just the Freedom Caucus but all members.

The protection would run both ways -- the Speaker would be bound to come in and give hell to the Chamber of Commerce for its big-government establishment liberal agitations against Tea Party congressmen, but the Freedom Caucus would be agreeing that Ryan should also defuse Tea Party attacks on big-government establishment liberals.

Not sure I like that.

I suppose for pure political advantage -- for the 2016 election -- it's advantageous to call a truce.

But I'm not of a mind for a truce.

posted by Ace at 07:22 PM

| Access Comments