McCarthy Elected Speaker of the House on 15th Vote

 

Following four days of voting, negotiations, and drama, Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) has been elected Speaker of the House on the 15th ballot.

McCarthy garnered 216 votes after several early holdouts voted in his favor. Six other GOP holdouts voted “present”: Reps. Andy Biggs (R–AZ), Lauren Boebert (R–CO), Eli Crane (R–AZ), Matt Gaetz (R–FL), Bob Good (R–VA), and Matt Rosendale (R–MT). This lowered the number of votes McCarthy needed to grant him the Speaker’s gavel.

Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D–NY) gained 212 votes. The vote was concluded shortly after midnight.

In the 14th round of voting, McCarthy confronted Rep. Matt Gaetz, whose vote on that ballot would have given McCarthy the win. A motion to adjourn failed, so the 15th ballot moved forward.

With the Speakership settled, the House can finally get back to the important business of borrowing several trillions of dollars for unnecessary projects.

Published in General
Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 143 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Percival (View Comment):

    The Cynthonian (View Comment):

    A step in the right direction: https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2023/01/payback_mccarthy_to_yank_omar_swalwell_and_schiff_from_their_house_committee_assignments.html

    Swalwell off of the Intelligence Committee is a gimmie. He’s the poster boy for security risks.

    Except of course the Dimocrats wouldn’t do it.

    • #121
  2. Django Member
    Django
    @Django

    Percival (View Comment):

    The Cynthonian (View Comment):

    A step in the right direction: https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2023/01/payback_mccarthy_to_yank_omar_swalwell_and_schiff_from_their_house_committee_assignments.html

    Swalwell off of the Intelligence Committee is a gimmie. He’s the poster boy for security risks.

    Dan Crenshaw Loses Bid to Lead Top House Committee (townhall.com)

    Was this a form of payback as well?

    • #122
  3. Western Chauvinist Member
    Western Chauvinist
    @WesternChauvinist

    Django (View Comment):

    Percival (View Comment):

    The Cynthonian (View Comment):

    A step in the right direction: https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2023/01/payback_mccarthy_to_yank_omar_swalwell_and_schiff_from_their_house_committee_assignments.html

    Swalwell off of the Intelligence Committee is a gimmie. He’s the poster boy for security risks.

    Dan Crenshaw Loses Bid to Lead Top House Committee (townhall.com)

    Was this a form of payback as well?

    I dunno, but Crenshaw’s non-apology for the “terrorists” remark was disgusting. He’s on my short list for Worst House Republicans.

    • #123
  4. The Reticulator Member
    The Reticulator
    @TheReticulator

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    Theoretically, government actuarial systems can save society a hell of a lot of money. Politically, it never works out like that. Just pay them more, and skip the pension.

    That’s generically what I have learned from former congressman Jason Lewis and a Canadian guy that made a bunch of videos about how government pensions should work.

    If you ever think of this Canadian guy’s name, let us know. I might want to check it out.

    • #124
  5. DaveSchmidt Coolidge
    DaveSchmidt
    @DaveSchmidt

    HeavyWater (View Comment):

    DaveSchmidt (View Comment):

    Al Sparks (View Comment):

    DaveSchmidt (View Comment):
    I recently won re-election to the township board while having unattractive teeth, a bald head, and a smile that doesn’t show up on photographs.

    Well, you had the advantage of incumbency, so that doesn’t count. Assuming you weren’t initiallly appointed to the position to fill a vacancy, I guess the question is, who were your opponents when you initially ran? Did you run against a handsome man?

    Good point. I first ran as an anti-corruption candidate. In that case I could portray myself as a White Knight with my visor down and my lance at the ready.

    Those of us who believe that all politicians are corrupt are likely to think that “anti-corruption candidate” is an oxymoron.

    I have been called a moron (actually “idiot”) for my anti-corruption stand.  I couldn’t afford to attend Occidental College.  I had to go to another school to become a credentialed moron.  

    • #125
  6. Percival Thatcher
    Percival
    @Percival

    DaveSchmidt (View Comment):

    HeavyWater (View Comment):

    DaveSchmidt (View Comment):

    Al Sparks (View Comment):

    DaveSchmidt (View Comment):
    I recently won re-election to the township board while having unattractive teeth, a bald head, and a smile that doesn’t show up on photographs.

    Well, you had the advantage of incumbency, so that doesn’t count. Assuming you weren’t initiallly appointed to the position to fill a vacancy, I guess the question is, who were your opponents when you initially ran? Did you run against a handsome man?

    Good point. I first ran as an anti-corruption candidate. In that case I could portray myself as a White Knight with my visor down and my lance at the ready.

    Those of us who believe that all politicians are corrupt are likely to think that “anti-corruption candidate” is an oxymoron.

    I have been called a moron (actually “idiot”) for my anti-corruption stand. I couldn’t afford to attend Occidental College. I had to go to another school to become a credentialed moron.

    There is a lot of on-line coursework available.

    • #126
  7. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    The Reticulator (View Comment):

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    Theoretically, government actuarial systems can save society a hell of a lot of money. Politically, it never works out like that. Just pay them more, and skip the pension.

    That’s generically what I have learned from former congressman Jason Lewis and a Canadian guy that made a bunch of videos about how government pensions should work.

    If you ever think of this Canadian guy’s name, let us know. I might want to check it out.

    It’s this guy. For some reason, I can’t find the videos I saw. It was from real vision. I can’t find it behind the pay wall or out of it.

    The basic idea is, if society does it collectively, you only have to fund to the halfway point when everybody dies. In effect, if you lived at age 90 you don’t need as much *capital at all because other people have already kicked off. It’s common sense, but nobody talks like that and we certainly don’t run things that way. Now it’s going to implode society.

    • #127
  8. DaveSchmidt Coolidge
    DaveSchmidt
    @DaveSchmidt

    Percival (View Comment):

    DaveSchmidt (View Comment):

    HeavyWater (View Comment):

    DaveSchmidt (View Comment):

    Al Sparks (View Comment):

    DaveSchmidt (View Comment):
    I recently won re-election to the township board while having unattractive teeth, a bald head, and a smile that doesn’t show up on photographs.

    Well, you had the advantage of incumbency, so that doesn’t count. Assuming you weren’t initiallly appointed to the position to fill a vacancy, I guess the question is, who were your opponents when you initially ran? Did you run against a handsome man?

    Good point. I first ran as an anti-corruption candidate. In that case I could portray myself as a White Knight with my visor down and my lance at the ready.

    Those of us who believe that all politicians are corrupt are likely to think that “anti-corruption candidate” is an oxymoron.

    I have been called a moron (actually “idiot”) for my anti-corruption stand. I couldn’t afford to attend Occidental College. I had to go to another school to become a credentialed moron.

    There is a lot of on-line coursework available.

    But not in the 1970s. 

    • #128
  9. Percival Thatcher
    Percival
    @Percival

    DaveSchmidt (View Comment):

    Percival (View Comment):

    DaveSchmidt (View Comment):

    HeavyWater (View Comment):

    DaveSchmidt (View Comment):

    Al Sparks (View Comment):

    DaveSchmidt (View Comment):
    I recently won re-election to the township board while having unattractive teeth, a bald head, and a smile that doesn’t show up on photographs.

    Well, you had the advantage of incumbency, so that doesn’t count. Assuming you weren’t initiallly appointed to the position to fill a vacancy, I guess the question is, who were your opponents when you initially ran? Did you run against a handsome man?

    Good point. I first ran as an anti-corruption candidate. In that case I could portray myself as a White Knight with my visor down and my lance at the ready.

    Those of us who believe that all politicians are corrupt are likely to think that “anti-corruption candidate” is an oxymoron.

    I have been called a moron (actually “idiot”) for my anti-corruption stand. I couldn’t afford to attend Occidental College. I had to go to another school to become a credentialed moron.

    There is a lot of on-line coursework available.

    But not in the 1970s.

    That’s true. Back in the 70s, you had to tune your TV between channels to get the good stuff.

    • #129
  10. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    extreme correction to #127 lol

    • #130
  11. The Reticulator Member
    The Reticulator
    @TheReticulator

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    It’s this guy. For some reason, I can’t find the videos I saw. It was from real vision. I can’t find it behind the pay wall or out of it.

    The basic idea is, if society does it collectively, you only have to fund to the halfway point when everybody dies. In effect, if you lived at age 90 you don’t need as much calf at all because other people have already kicked off. It’s common sense, but nobody talks like that and we certainly don’t run things that way. Now it’s going to implode society.

    But he favors defined benefit plans!  That’s where I stopped listening. 

    • #131
  12. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    The Reticulator (View Comment):

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    It’s this guy. For some reason, I can’t find the videos I saw. It was from real vision. I can’t find it behind the pay wall or out of it.

    The basic idea is, if society does it collectively, you only have to fund to the halfway point when everybody dies. In effect, if you lived at age 90 you don’t need as much calf at all because other people have already kicked off. It’s common sense, but nobody talks like that and we certainly don’t run things that way. Now it’s going to implode society.

    But he favors defined benefit plans! That’s where I stopped listening.

    If you literally have a fully funded annuity system, everybody is going to be better off. You literally only have to save half the capital. The *private sector can keep the other half, or people can simply be poorer by choice or not.

    • #132
  13. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    Another major edit! lol #132

    • #133
  14. David C. Broussard Coolidge
    David C. Broussard
    @Dbroussa

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    JoshuaFinch (View Comment):

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    The Reticulator (View Comment):

    HeavyWater (View Comment):

    DaveSchmidt (View Comment):

    Al Sparks (View Comment):

    DaveSchmidt (View Comment):
    I recently won re-election to the township board while having unattractive teeth, a bald head, and a smile that doesn’t show up on photographs.

    Well, you had the advantage of incumbency, so that doesn’t count. Assuming you weren’t initiallly appointed to the position to fill a vacancy, I guess the question is, who were your opponents when you initially ran? Did you run against a handsome man?

    Good point. I first ran as an anti-corruption candidate. In that case I could portray myself as a White Knight with my visor down and my lance at the ready.

    Those of us who believe that all politicians are corrupt are likely to think that “anti-corruption candidate” is an oxymoron.

    There’s no reason an anti-corruption candidate can’t be corrupt. Some of them are corrupt from the start, and some of them will become corrupt as they go along. Hardly any will become less corrupt than they started out.

    If the government doesn’t stick to actual public goods and the central bank doesn’t have a much “harder” monetary policy, you are going to get more corruption than need be in government and society. Conservatives can whine about it anyway they want, but that is what you are up against.

    That’s why term limits are such a good idea. Before a guy can get corrupt, he has to leave office.

    I want to make it clear that I’m not the final word on this. It didn’t work in California at all. The state got taken over by the bureaucrats, lobbyists, and the unions. I think people should be able to vote for whoever they want.

    Where we really need term limits is on the bureaucracy not the politicians. 

    • #134
  15. Western Chauvinist Member
    Western Chauvinist
    @WesternChauvinist

    David C. Broussard (View Comment):

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    JoshuaFinch (View Comment):

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    The Reticulator (View Comment):

    HeavyWater (View Comment):

    DaveSchmidt (View Comment):

    Al Sparks (View Comment):

    DaveSchmidt (View Comment):
    I recently won re-election to the township board while having unattractive teeth, a bald head, and a smile that doesn’t show up on photographs.

    Well, you had the advantage of incumbency, so that doesn’t count. Assuming you weren’t initiallly appointed to the position to fill a vacancy, I guess the question is, who were your opponents when you initially ran? Did you run against a handsome man?

    Good point. I first ran as an anti-corruption candidate. In that case I could portray myself as a White Knight with my visor down and my lance at the ready.

    Those of us who believe that all politicians are corrupt are likely to think that “anti-corruption candidate” is an oxymoron.

    There’s no reason an anti-corruption candidate can’t be corrupt. Some of them are corrupt from the start, and some of them will become corrupt as they go along. Hardly any will become less corrupt than they started out.

    If the government doesn’t stick to actual public goods and the central bank doesn’t have a much “harder” monetary policy, you are going to get more corruption than need be in government and society. Conservatives can whine about it anyway they want, but that is what you are up against.

    That’s why term limits are such a good idea. Before a guy can get corrupt, he has to leave office.

    I want to make it clear that I’m not the final word on this. It didn’t work in California at all. The state got taken over by the bureaucrats, lobbyists, and the unions. I think people should be able to vote for whoever they want.

    Where we really need term limits is on the bureaucracy not the politicians.

    Or, we could just shutter entire agencies and limit terms that way. . . 

    I can dream, can’t I?

    • #135
  16. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    Western Chauvinist (View Comment):

    David C. Broussard (View Comment):

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    JoshuaFinch (View Comment):

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    The Reticulator (View Comment):

    HeavyWater (View Comment):

    DaveSchmidt (View Comment):

    Al Sparks (View Comment):

    DaveSchmidt (View Comment):
    I recently won re-election to the township board while having unattractive teeth, a bald head, and a smile that doesn’t show up on photographs.

    Well, you had the advantage of incumbency, so that doesn’t count. Assuming you weren’t initiallly appointed to the position to fill a vacancy, I guess the question is, who were your opponents when you initially ran? Did you run against a handsome man?

    Good point. I first ran as an anti-corruption candidate. In that case I could portray myself as a White Knight with my visor down and my lance at the ready.

    Those of us who believe that all politicians are corrupt are likely to think that “anti-corruption candidate” is an oxymoron.

    There’s no reason an anti-corruption candidate can’t be corrupt. Some of them are corrupt from the start, and some of them will become corrupt as they go along. Hardly any will become less corrupt than they started out.

    If the government doesn’t stick to actual public goods and the central bank doesn’t have a much “harder” monetary policy, you are going to get more corruption than need be in government and society. Conservatives can whine about it anyway they want, but that is what you are up against.

    That’s why term limits are such a good idea. Before a guy can get corrupt, he has to leave office.

    I want to make it clear that I’m not the final word on this. It didn’t work in California at all. The state got taken over by the bureaucrats, lobbyists, and the unions. I think people should be able to vote for whoever they want.

    Where we really need term limits is on the bureaucracy not the politicians.

    Or, we could just shutter entire agencies and limit terms that way. . .

    I can dream, can’t I?

    “Public goods” only.

    I have never been successfully challenged on this concept even once. 

    • #136
  17. DaveSchmidt Coolidge
    DaveSchmidt
    @DaveSchmidt

    David C. Broussard (View Comment):

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    JoshuaFinch (View Comment):

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    The Reticulator (View Comment):

    HeavyWater (View Comment):

    DaveSchmidt (View Comment):

    Al Sparks (View Comment):

    DaveSchmidt (View Comment):
    I recently won re-election to the township board while having unattractive teeth, a bald head, and a smile that doesn’t show up on photographs.

    Well, you had the advantage of incumbency, so that doesn’t count. Assuming you weren’t initiallly appointed to the position to fill a vacancy, I guess the question is, who were your opponents when you initially ran? Did you run against a handsome man?

    Good point. I first ran as an anti-corruption candidate. In that case I could portray myself as a White Knight with my visor down and my lance at the ready.

    Those of us who believe that all politicians are corrupt are likely to think that “anti-corruption candidate” is an oxymoron.

    There’s no reason an anti-corruption candidate can’t be corrupt. Some of them are corrupt from the start, and some of them will become corrupt as they go along. Hardly any will become less corrupt than they started out.

    If the government doesn’t stick to actual public goods and the central bank doesn’t have a much “harder” monetary policy, you are going to get more corruption than need be in government and society. Conservatives can whine about it anyway they want, but that is what you are up against.

    That’s why term limits are such a good idea. Before a guy can get corrupt, he has to leave office.

    I want to make it clear that I’m not the final word on this. It didn’t work in California at all. The state got taken over by the bureaucrats, lobbyists, and the unions. I think people should be able to vote for whoever they want.

    Where we really need term limits is on the bureaucracy not the politicians.

    And reduce the pensions.  

    • #137
  18. Percival Thatcher
    Percival
    @Percival

    DaveSchmidt (View Comment):

    David C. Broussard (View Comment):

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    JoshuaFinch (View Comment):

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    The Reticulator (View Comment):

    HeavyWater (View Comment):

    DaveSchmidt (View Comment):

    Al Sparks (View Comment):

    DaveSchmidt (View Comment):
    I recently won re-election to the township board while having unattractive teeth, a bald head, and a smile that doesn’t show up on photographs.

    Well, you had the advantage of incumbency, so that doesn’t count. Assuming you weren’t initiallly appointed to the position to fill a vacancy, I guess the question is, who were your opponents when you initially ran? Did you run against a handsome man?

    Good point. I first ran as an anti-corruption candidate. In that case I could portray myself as a White Knight with my visor down and my lance at the ready.

    Those of us who believe that all politicians are corrupt are likely to think that “anti-corruption candidate” is an oxymoron.

    There’s no reason an anti-corruption candidate can’t be corrupt. Some of them are corrupt from the start, and some of them will become corrupt as they go along. Hardly any will become less corrupt than they started out.

    If the government doesn’t stick to actual public goods and the central bank doesn’t have a much “harder” monetary policy, you are going to get more corruption than need be in government and society. Conservatives can whine about it anyway they want, but that is what you are up against.

    That’s why term limits are such a good idea. Before a guy can get corrupt, he has to leave office.

    I want to make it clear that I’m not the final word on this. It didn’t work in California at all. The state got taken over by the bureaucrats, lobbyists, and the unions. I think people should be able to vote for whoever they want.

    Where we really need term limits is on the bureaucracy not the politicians.

    And reduce the pensions.

    And move the offices somewhere cheaper than D.C.

    • #138
  19. Western Chauvinist Member
    Western Chauvinist
    @WesternChauvinist

    Percival (View Comment):

    Where we really need term limits is on the bureaucracy not the politicians.

    And reduce the pensions.

    And move the offices somewhere cheaper than D.C.

    Closer to the people they “serve” in flyover country. 

    • #139
  20. Al Sparks Coolidge
    Al Sparks
    @AlSparks

    Western Chauvinist (View Comment):

    I dunno, but Crenshaw’s non-apology for the “terrorists” remark was disgusting. He’s on my short list for Worst House Republicans.

    I’m on Crenshaw’s side.  I haven’t heard Crenshaw’s non-apology, but people are just too sensitive.

    It’s not that big of a deal, and to make more of it than it is says more about the people making more of it.

    Is there anyone of sound mind that thinks that Crenshaw was literally saying the group were literally terroists?  I don’t mind his being called on it in a measured way, but why add to the hyperbole?

    And why is a full throated apology really necessary?

    • #140
  21. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Al Sparks (View Comment):

    Western Chauvinist (View Comment):

    I dunno, but Crenshaw’s non-apology for the “terrorists” remark was disgusting. He’s on my short list for Worst House Republicans.

    I’m on Crenshaw’s side. I haven’t heard Crenshaw’s non-apology, but people are just too sensitive.

    It’s not that big of a deal, and to make more of it than it is says more about the people making more of it.

    Is there anyone of sound mind that thinks that Crenshaw was literally saying the group were literally terroists? I don’t mind his being called on it in a measured way, but why add to the hyperbole?

    And why is a full throated apology really necessary?

    Maybe he should do something like when Kamala Harris said about her accusing Biden of racism during the campaign, “hahaha, it was just an election!”

    • #141
  22. David C. Broussard Coolidge
    David C. Broussard
    @Dbroussa

    Al Sparks (View Comment):

    Western Chauvinist (View Comment):

    I dunno, but Crenshaw’s non-apology for the “terrorists” remark was disgusting. He’s on my short list for Worst House Republicans.

    I’m on Crenshaw’s side. I haven’t heard Crenshaw’s non-apology, but people are just too sensitive.

    It’s not that big of a deal, and to make more of it than it is says more about the people making more of it.

    Is there anyone of sound mind that thinks that Crenshaw was literally saying the group were literally terroists? I don’t mind his being called on it in a measured way, but why add to the hyperbole?

    I guess I am not of sound mind then in yiur estimate. He was livid and hurling invective when he was interviewed. His use of terrorists was because he felt the holdouts were holding the Caucus hostage, when he called them enemies later he meant it. 

    And why is a full throated apology really necessary?

    I guess if you think calling your Caucus mates terrorist and enemies isn’t a big deal then it isn’t, and since he didn’t apologize, he either still thinks they are terrorists and enemies or he thinks calling someone that is meaningless. I figure he either is an enemy and terrorist to conservatives, or those terms don’t matter and we can just call him Dan “Terrorist” Crenshaw from now on. 

     

    • #142
  23. Bryan G. Stephens Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens
    @BryanGStephens

    We don’t need term limits. Congress needs to legislate and not give power to agencies. 

    State Legislatures around the nation are far more functional (though some are not) 

    • #143
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.