Now that Kevin McCarthy has donned a straitjacket in order to be elected Speaker of the House by his own party, the Congress can now get down to the business of legislating.
Very helpful analysis, Jay. Perhaps "moderate" Republican congresspeople will have the courage to block this nonsense, but that is highly doubtful. Apparently, they were utterly powerless to stop the steal by the MAGA wing. MAGA reps pulled off a brazen in-public smash-and-grab. In fact, these hooligans were celebrated by right-wing media. Gaetz, in particular, thinks he is some kind of hero for stripping the cupboard bare. This frankly ridiculous politicking will torture us for the next 24 months.
It would have taken only six, just SIX, Republicans to say to McCarthy “Stop being a wimp cowering before Boebert and act like a *leader*. Stop giving into the crazies or we’re doing a deal with the Dems.”
Just SIX reasonable (aka, moderate) Republicans. But there were not. They all cowered before Boebert.
Because THERE ARE NO ACTUAL MODERATE REPUBLICANS in Congress. There aren’t even any air-quote “moderate” Republicans.
Actually that’s not true, is it? It was 20 to 212. If there are moderate republicans in the house, I can see why they wouldn’t cut a deal with Dems to elect Jeffries. There really is too much power with the Speaker even under the rule of the last Congress. But they sure weren’t voting with the Derps.
We may know more when the actual votes on the rules happens. Or on things like a vote to impeach anyone. (I’ve seen people advocating “impeaching” Hunter and Fauci!!). Or the debt ceiling and trying to take Social Security hostage. Or on any half-baked culture war legislation which they know won’t get past Senate and veto.
Only time will tell. The best thing that would happen is for news outlets to boycott the stupider investigations. Or at least just report “the committee to vilify Fauci turned up nothing interesting today”
What’s not true? That there are NO moderate Republicans?
But there aren’t.  Oh, there are certainly some that *claim* to be. That, if being interviewed on TV, or giving a soundbite to a reporter, will say that they are wanting to get rid of the crazies in the GOP. But when it came down to it, they voted for McCarthy, every single round without ever making their own demands that he not bow to the extremists.
“Moderate” Republicans could’ve gone to McCarthy and said “We only need to get a few Democrats. Let’s make a deal with them to actually govern. Let’s negotiate rules with four or five Democrats and give them seats on committees instead of giving those seats to Boebert and Gaetz . And then we’ll be able to do things WITH US IN CHARGE rather than the radical extremists that you’re bending over for.”
But they didn’t do that. No more than these “moderates“ voted to certify the election results or took action to get the insurrectionists out of their party, or at least stripped of power.
Who do you think Republican voters, who voted these people into office, will blame when their S.S. checks don't arrive? You just know they will find a way to put the blame on Democrats. smh
That is the irony here. The states most dependent on the largesse of the federal government are virtually ALL red states, so when they shut down the government they will be hurting their own constituents the most.
I don't normally quibble over wording, but I feel like as a movement we need to stop calling the extremist far-right faction "rebels." My reasoning is it's too cool and they like it too much.
Movement conservatives and now the extremist far right have waged and won a battle of messaging and propaganda over the past decades (with every breath calling Democrats and bygone moderate Republicans "soft on crime," "socialist" and on and on). I think we should unify around words like "obstructionists" or "radical extremists" that are not only accurate but express the real scale of the harm they're doing and already carry negative cultural weight, and stick to those words.
I noticed you called out your own use of "moderate Republicans" and I'm glad you did - I want to ask every single news outlet who uses it to do the same. There are no more moderate Republicans. They have been actively purged from the party by far-right radical extremists. There is no one left but a) hard-line, far right corporatist Republicans, b) obstructionist would-be personality cult leaders, and c) fully anti-government, Christofascist zealots.
They are the ones who are soft on crime, specifically the crime they and their friends commit. They are the ones who are extremists. They are the ones who are Republicans in name only. We need to win the messaging battles in the future as obsessively as they have, but we need to do it hamstringed by the constraints of fact.
We also need to stop calling them "conservatives". My dad was a conservative, but I am glad he is dead and does not have to witness what the party he worked so hard for has turned into.
Get prepared for more sordid mess tomorrow. The statement by a McCarthy voice today "this is the same rule package accept one change" is FALSE. There is a document now dubbed the "Secret Appendix" that lists the K-deals with the Devils. The Rules Commitee is the "Traffic Cop" directing or barring House bills to the Floor. The new "Rules" Gang is now 9 to 4 McCarthyites. We need the "Appendix" secret or othereise published ASAP.
Meanwhile, per the Office of the House Clerk, the House considered House Resolution 6
(H. Res. 6) "was considered as a privileged matter" at 7:10PM ... noting that "the title of this measure is not available". An additional Clerk entry noted that H. Res 6 involved "consent to assemble outside the seat of government". Jay? Anybody?
Oh, no! CNN just reported that less than a dozen classified documents marked "SCI" were found in President Biden's home office. The documents were from Biden's time as Vice-President. The extremists are licking their chops to open the first House investigation. CNN also played a clip of a 60 Minutes interview that Joe Biden gave after the DOJ opened the Mar a Lago investigation, in which he said that he can't understand how the classified documents could've ended up at Mar a Lago. No doubt, Fox will be playing that clip in an endless loop.
One editorial note: I really think the freedom caucus (lower case intentional there) should always be referred to as the "Freedom" Caucus. Just because extremists and fascists think and say they're for freedom, doesn't make it so. Especially with that group.
Not sure where the rules are all at, at the moment, but I fully expect the folks pushing back to cave completely. There's really no moderates left, and the ones who may be considered close to that are fearful of the Q-, fasicst- and MAGA-loving crazies that will get sicced on them.
Thank you for your thoughtful breakdown. I do have one question.
If it only takes one vote for a “motion to vacate,“ wouldn’t the Democrats be able to do that going forward anytime some of this ridiculous legislation was proposed? Doesn’t that permit the Democrats to throw any Republican speaker under the bus for any reason at all?
The motion to Vacate is the only Mccarhy Deal that made into the copy of the Rules voted on Today but, NOT the document now dubbed the "Secret Appendix' that spells out exactly how McCarhty destroyed his speakership by giveaways. We need the Appendix secret or otherwise published ASAP.
is there actually a new proposed rules package including the concessions Mc. made? The only one I can find is dated 1/6, and what it says about the "motion to vacate" involves 5 members.
"Resolution Declaring the Office of Speaker Vacant. Subsection (c) modifies the privileged status of a resolution offered by a Member of a majority party causing a vacancy in the Office of Speaker to require that it must have accumulated 4 cosponsors from the majority party in order to receive privilege.''
Any idea when a revised rules package will be coming out?
There is little doubt that the term "congress-critters" is now exceedingly appropriate, at least with respect to the Freedom Caucus.
By the way, I have never understood that name. Who is it that is given freedom by that particular gathering, anyway? They aren't free, since they are constantly on watch for someone, in the group or outside it, who might undermine the new social order. And with the new cops being the biggest crooks, nobody else is particularly safe either!
Interesting to note that even a Democrat could file a motion to vacate. I realize there is some risk, but what could actually be worse than someone who has already sold his soul and control to the MAGAt caucus? I think a Dem should file a motion to vacate on a monthly, if not weekly, basis.
Very helpful analysis, Jay. Perhaps "moderate" Republican congresspeople will have the courage to block this nonsense, but that is highly doubtful. Apparently, they were utterly powerless to stop the steal by the MAGA wing. MAGA reps pulled off a brazen in-public smash-and-grab. In fact, these hooligans were celebrated by right-wing media. Gaetz, in particular, thinks he is some kind of hero for stripping the cupboard bare. This frankly ridiculous politicking will torture us for the next 24 months.
It would have taken only six, just SIX, Republicans to say to McCarthy “Stop being a wimp cowering before Boebert and act like a *leader*. Stop giving into the crazies or we’re doing a deal with the Dems.”
Just SIX reasonable (aka, moderate) Republicans. But there were not. They all cowered before Boebert.
Because THERE ARE NO ACTUAL MODERATE REPUBLICANS in Congress. There aren’t even any air-quote “moderate” Republicans.
Orange Jesus castrated the entire GOP, and the party took care of the few he missed. Just ask Liz.
Actually that’s not true, is it? It was 20 to 212. If there are moderate republicans in the house, I can see why they wouldn’t cut a deal with Dems to elect Jeffries. There really is too much power with the Speaker even under the rule of the last Congress. But they sure weren’t voting with the Derps.
We may know more when the actual votes on the rules happens. Or on things like a vote to impeach anyone. (I’ve seen people advocating “impeaching” Hunter and Fauci!!). Or the debt ceiling and trying to take Social Security hostage. Or on any half-baked culture war legislation which they know won’t get past Senate and veto.
Only time will tell. The best thing that would happen is for news outlets to boycott the stupider investigations. Or at least just report “the committee to vilify Fauci turned up nothing interesting today”
What’s not true? That there are NO moderate Republicans?
But there aren’t.  Oh, there are certainly some that *claim* to be. That, if being interviewed on TV, or giving a soundbite to a reporter, will say that they are wanting to get rid of the crazies in the GOP. But when it came down to it, they voted for McCarthy, every single round without ever making their own demands that he not bow to the extremists.
“Moderate” Republicans could’ve gone to McCarthy and said “We only need to get a few Democrats. Let’s make a deal with them to actually govern. Let’s negotiate rules with four or five Democrats and give them seats on committees instead of giving those seats to Boebert and Gaetz . And then we’ll be able to do things WITH US IN CHARGE rather than the radical extremists that you’re bending over for.”
But they didn’t do that. No more than these “moderates“ voted to certify the election results or took action to get the insurrectionists out of their party, or at least stripped of power.

They indeed did not block it…
Of course they didn’t. Something can’t be done by people who don’t exist.
Sheila Strand suggests, “Perhaps ‘moderate’ Republican congresspeople will have the courage to block this nonsense...”
Perhaps “moderate“ Republican congresspeople would. But there are no moderate Republican congresspeople. 
Who do you think Republican voters, who voted these people into office, will blame when their S.S. checks don't arrive? You just know they will find a way to put the blame on Democrats. smh
That is the irony here. The states most dependent on the largesse of the federal government are virtually ALL red states, so when they shut down the government they will be hurting their own constituents the most.
Silly Larry. The people who live in their states aren’t their constituents. The wealthy who pay for their elections and get tax breaks in return are!
I don't normally quibble over wording, but I feel like as a movement we need to stop calling the extremist far-right faction "rebels." My reasoning is it's too cool and they like it too much.
Movement conservatives and now the extremist far right have waged and won a battle of messaging and propaganda over the past decades (with every breath calling Democrats and bygone moderate Republicans "soft on crime," "socialist" and on and on). I think we should unify around words like "obstructionists" or "radical extremists" that are not only accurate but express the real scale of the harm they're doing and already carry negative cultural weight, and stick to those words.
I noticed you called out your own use of "moderate Republicans" and I'm glad you did - I want to ask every single news outlet who uses it to do the same. There are no more moderate Republicans. They have been actively purged from the party by far-right radical extremists. There is no one left but a) hard-line, far right corporatist Republicans, b) obstructionist would-be personality cult leaders, and c) fully anti-government, Christofascist zealots.
They are the ones who are soft on crime, specifically the crime they and their friends commit. They are the ones who are extremists. They are the ones who are Republicans in name only. We need to win the messaging battles in the future as obsessively as they have, but we need to do it hamstringed by the constraints of fact.
I believe that we are only just seeing Democrats beginning to roll up their sleeves to participate in the “framing war.”
Took fucking long enough. A couple of decades.
Hope Hicks wrote. “We all look like domestic terrorists now.” I think we should use that.
We also need to stop calling them "conservatives". My dad was a conservative, but I am glad he is dead and does not have to witness what the party he worked so hard for has turned into.
Ari Melber was referring to them last week as “the hijackers.”
Thank you for helping me to better understand all the chaos.
This gives me very sick feeling about the future of our country and democracy.
We can only hope grandma smacks them upside the head and knocks some sense into them.
Thank you so much for this! While sickening to read, it’s helpful to know that for which we need to be prepared.
Get prepared for more sordid mess tomorrow. The statement by a McCarthy voice today "this is the same rule package accept one change" is FALSE. There is a document now dubbed the "Secret Appendix" that lists the K-deals with the Devils. The Rules Commitee is the "Traffic Cop" directing or barring House bills to the Floor. The new "Rules" Gang is now 9 to 4 McCarthyites. We need the "Appendix" secret or othereise published ASAP.
Meanwhile, per the Office of the House Clerk, the House considered House Resolution 6
(H. Res. 6) "was considered as a privileged matter" at 7:10PM ... noting that "the title of this measure is not available". An additional Clerk entry noted that H. Res 6 involved "consent to assemble outside the seat of government". Jay? Anybody?
Oh, no! CNN just reported that less than a dozen classified documents marked "SCI" were found in President Biden's home office. The documents were from Biden's time as Vice-President. The extremists are licking their chops to open the first House investigation. CNN also played a clip of a 60 Minutes interview that Joe Biden gave after the DOJ opened the Mar a Lago investigation, in which he said that he can't understand how the classified documents could've ended up at Mar a Lago. No doubt, Fox will be playing that clip in an endless loop.
Correction. The documents were found not in Biden’s home office, but in his office at the Penn Biden Center in DC where he previously taught.
Thanks for explaining this in an easy way to understand! Still think McBarfy is dumb for capitulating to the so-called Freedom caucus.
Excellent, if at times scary, analysis.
One editorial note: I really think the freedom caucus (lower case intentional there) should always be referred to as the "Freedom" Caucus. Just because extremists and fascists think and say they're for freedom, doesn't make it so. Especially with that group.
Not sure where the rules are all at, at the moment, but I fully expect the folks pushing back to cave completely. There's really no moderates left, and the ones who may be considered close to that are fearful of the Q-, fasicst- and MAGA-loving crazies that will get sicced on them.
Thank you for your thoughtful breakdown. I do have one question.
If it only takes one vote for a “motion to vacate,“ wouldn’t the Democrats be able to do that going forward anytime some of this ridiculous legislation was proposed? Doesn’t that permit the Democrats to throw any Republican speaker under the bus for any reason at all?
It’s complicated as to why, but that motion might get sent immediately to the Rules committee where it could get squashed.
Only if the Dems were ABSOLUTELY SURE they could get someone better voted in.
The motion to Vacate is the only Mccarhy Deal that made into the copy of the Rules voted on Today but, NOT the document now dubbed the "Secret Appendix' that spells out exactly how McCarhty destroyed his speakership by giveaways. We need the Appendix secret or otherwise published ASAP.
is there actually a new proposed rules package including the concessions Mc. made? The only one I can find is dated 1/6, and what it says about the "motion to vacate" involves 5 members.
"Resolution Declaring the Office of Speaker Vacant. Subsection (c) modifies the privileged status of a resolution offered by a Member of a majority party causing a vacancy in the Office of Speaker to require that it must have accumulated 4 cosponsors from the majority party in order to receive privilege.''
Any idea when a revised rules package will be coming out?
I am newly subscribed to Library of Congress "House Floor Updates" -- nothing yet; need valid source(s) -- best not to speculate.
There is little doubt that the term "congress-critters" is now exceedingly appropriate, at least with respect to the Freedom Caucus.
By the way, I have never understood that name. Who is it that is given freedom by that particular gathering, anyway? They aren't free, since they are constantly on watch for someone, in the group or outside it, who might undermine the new social order. And with the new cops being the biggest crooks, nobody else is particularly safe either!
Interesting to note that even a Democrat could file a motion to vacate. I realize there is some risk, but what could actually be worse than someone who has already sold his soul and control to the MAGAt caucus? I think a Dem should file a motion to vacate on a monthly, if not weekly, basis.