When I say "more posts like this", I do not mean less Nate content. Nate content is great. I am happy to pay for it and derive great value from it. That said,
The most obvious long-term fix is to only allow motions to vacate that come with a new nominee for Speaker. You can vacate the chair, but only if it's simultaneously filled with someone else.
Advantages the old coalition and the status quo, but avoids chaos, and right now that looks like a good deal.
How is empowering McHenry different than electing a speaker? Isn’t that not actually building a procedural coalition? Can’t he be ousted as well if some are unhappy with him?
Given the game theory described here, I'm not sure why the Democrats didn't just vote 'present' to the resolution to vacate the Speaker's office? Wouldn't that have left McCarthy as a corpse hanging in the breeze, with the Republicans unable to replace him yet unwilling to cut him down?
If it was always strongly in their interest to vote the Speaker out, why didn't they propose the resolution to vacate at some point earlier themselves, to try to tempt the HFC faction into it?
It's not really in the Dems' interest either way when there is no GOP inducement to them which is why they did what they did. If the GOP wants to self-immolate, let them, but there's no reason for Dems to help out 1 GOP faction over another unless the Dems actually get something out of doing so.
That seems to fly in the face of the zero-sum-game assumption underlying all this, though. If the Republicans self-immolating in the town square has strictly positive EV for the Democrats, why not slip them the match?
Game theory? As the GOP is almost reflexively anti-Dem in everything now, the Dems proposing to vacate probably would have pushed the HFC _against_ the idea.
If people could be realistic a representative like Julia Letlow who is pro-vaccine because her husband died from Covid and will never amount to anything in the GOP would cut a deal with a few Republicans and Democrats and become Speaker. She is educated and can’t really believe the BS her husband pretended to believe and so she could actually just pass single issue bills until all of our problems are solved.
It's hard for most humans to go against their tribe. You'd essentially need a handful of Republicans willing to give up their political careers and face ostracization from their GOP friends.
There was a lot of criticism last fall that Pelosi did not agree to a longer term debt ceiling deal. It was hard to understand why to push this into 2023. Is it possible that Pelosi saw that it would fracture the Republican Party, thus forcing them to some eventually reckoning?
Of the many things that have come out of this, one is that her handling of the Democratic factions has become that much more impressive.
Some members haven’t got the memo yet, but this is now the America First party. Eventually they will once they lose their reelection primary. Win win as you said.
Matt Glassman: please do not default to male pronouns for generic/hypothetical people. It perpetuates the sexist frames that continue to harm women in politics to this day.
When I say "more posts like this", I do not mean less Nate content. Nate content is great. I am happy to pay for it and derive great value from it. That said,
More posts like this!
10/10, no notes
It was very well done.
Great piece. I learned a lot.
The most obvious long-term fix is to only allow motions to vacate that come with a new nominee for Speaker. You can vacate the chair, but only if it's simultaneously filled with someone else.
Advantages the old coalition and the status quo, but avoids chaos, and right now that looks like a good deal.
Fascinating and complex. The old Nate 538 we need and love
Such excellent explanation. I genuinely learned a lot. I wouldn’t be surprised if they deadlock, and McHenry is granted more authority.
Ditto
Truly fantastic post
Agree. I don't even care about the machinations of the US congress (am in the UK) but I found it a fascinating read.
That scatter plot of the first Jordan vote is a thing of beauty. Great post!
Dam Matt, well said.
How is empowering McHenry different than electing a speaker? Isn’t that not actually building a procedural coalition? Can’t he be ousted as well if some are unhappy with him?
Given the game theory described here, I'm not sure why the Democrats didn't just vote 'present' to the resolution to vacate the Speaker's office? Wouldn't that have left McCarthy as a corpse hanging in the breeze, with the Republicans unable to replace him yet unwilling to cut him down?
If it was always strongly in their interest to vote the Speaker out, why didn't they propose the resolution to vacate at some point earlier themselves, to try to tempt the HFC faction into it?
It's not really in the Dems' interest either way when there is no GOP inducement to them which is why they did what they did. If the GOP wants to self-immolate, let them, but there's no reason for Dems to help out 1 GOP faction over another unless the Dems actually get something out of doing so.
That seems to fly in the face of the zero-sum-game assumption underlying all this, though. If the Republicans self-immolating in the town square has strictly positive EV for the Democrats, why not slip them the match?
Game theory? As the GOP is almost reflexively anti-Dem in everything now, the Dems proposing to vacate probably would have pushed the HFC _against_ the idea.
If people could be realistic a representative like Julia Letlow who is pro-vaccine because her husband died from Covid and will never amount to anything in the GOP would cut a deal with a few Republicans and Democrats and become Speaker. She is educated and can’t really believe the BS her husband pretended to believe and so she could actually just pass single issue bills until all of our problems are solved.
It's hard for most humans to go against their tribe. You'd essentially need a handful of Republicans willing to give up their political careers and face ostracization from their GOP friends.
Letlow’s career is over—she advocated the vaccines in Louisiana. Only Trump will be forgiven for doing that.
Question for Matt:
There was a lot of criticism last fall that Pelosi did not agree to a longer term debt ceiling deal. It was hard to understand why to push this into 2023. Is it possible that Pelosi saw that it would fracture the Republican Party, thus forcing them to some eventually reckoning?
Of the many things that have come out of this, one is that her handling of the Democratic factions has become that much more impressive.
The problem was the Senate, not the House. If Manchin/Sinema wasn't in favor of extending the debt ceiling long term, it wasn't getting extended.
Fantastic post
Some members haven’t got the memo yet, but this is now the America First party. Eventually they will once they lose their reelection primary. Win win as you said.
I think the mchenry solution
1. Solves everything solvable in this session
2. Might be implemented by the speaker advancing a popular bill
Matt Glassman: please do not default to male pronouns for generic/hypothetical people. It perpetuates the sexist frames that continue to harm women in politics to this day.