There are 105 comments.

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

    I don’t follow the news that closely, what are his conditions?

    • #1
  2. James Madison Member
    James Madison
    @JamesMadison

    The most important requirement from Ryan is an agreement that there will be no motions from the GOP members to “vacate the chair,” in other words call a vote for a new speaker. This will probably not fly with the Freedom Caucus.

    The Freedom Caucus made a host of demands to Ryan to reduce the power of the Speaker, which lost the most powerful tool to forge unity when Boehner stopped earmarks. The result is the Freedom Caucus wants to make the Republican House Speaker pretty much powerless and then, with the “vacate the chair” motion” keep a gun at his head.

    From here, the Dems can join with the GOP to elect Ryan, but it sounds like he will withdraw his name if all three caucuses in the GOP House membership do not support him.

    Two of the caucuses will support him.

    Soooo, its back to the drawing board if the FC (40 members) do not vote 80% for Ryan.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/22/us/politics/paul-ryan-house-speaker-freedom-caucus.html?&hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&module=first-column-region®ion=top-news&WT.nav=top-news

    • #2
  3. Stan Hjerleid Inactive
    Stan Hjerleid
    @StanHjerleid

    Not reasonable.

    • #3
  4. Aaron Miller Member
    Aaron Miller
    @AaronMiller

    Mike H:I don’t follow the news that closely, what are his conditions?

    From the Washington Post:

    “I laid out . . . what I think it takes to unify this conference, what I think it takes to have a successful speakership, and it’s in their hands,” he told reporters. “I’ll leave it up to my colleagues to decide if I am that unifying person.”

    It sounds to me like he wants Republicans to pledge loyalty to him, rather than to a plan he is offering. There is his “Roadmap” for financial concerns, presumably.

    Paul Ryan is liked by both factions within the party. He is a good communicator and willing to offer concrete strategies for tackling entitlements, though his plan relies on decades of Republican control. He would be a good choice.

    But it would be reasonable for Republicans to demand some basic overview of his ideas for compromise. Trust is in short supply these days.

    • #4
  5. Mendel Inactive
    Mendel
    @Mendel

    Like Mike, I don’t know enough about Ryan’s conditions (and what they really mean) to have an opinion on whether they’re reasonable. However, considering Ryan didn’t want the worst job in Washington and is being begged to take it, I think he has every right to demand as much as he wants.

    But in either case, I think it’s time for the Freedom Caucus to put up or shut up. Either agree to his conditions and live peacefully with him as speaker, or withdraw support immediately and push their own guy. But don’t vote for him now and then moan about his tyrannical ways later.

    • #5
  6. LilyBart Inactive
    LilyBart
    @LilyBart

    Its a shame the republican leadership won’t use their negotiating tactics and skills when negotiating with the democrats.  They save their ‘fights’ for limited government conservatives.  Now, why do you think that is?

    • #6
  7. LilyBart Inactive
    LilyBart
    @LilyBart

    He doesn’t want the job.  Accept this and move on.

    • #7
  8. Sabrdance Member
    Sabrdance
    @Sabrdance

    I would rather the condition be “don’t use the Motion to Vacate the Chair until January 2017” than “eliminate the Motion to Vacate the Chair.”  And I don’t think some concessions on his own regarding say immigration or the ex-im bank would be uncalled for.  Otherwise, I find them reasonable.

    • #8
  9. Frank Soto Contributor
    Frank Soto
    @FrankSoto

    Sabrdance:I would rather the condition be “don’t use the Motion to Vacate the Chair until January 2017” than “eliminate the Motion to Vacate the Chair.” And I don’t think some concessions on his own regarding say immigration or the ex-im bank would be uncalled for. Otherwise, I find them reasonable.

    Right, if Ryan would just agree to a few things along these lines then the freedom caucus should acknowledge that they won’t be doing any better than this.

    • #9
  10. Mike H Coolidge
    Mike H
    @MikeH

    Sabrdance: And I don’t think some concessions on his own regarding say immigration or the ex-im bank would be uncalled for.

    Is Ryan pro Ex-Im bank? That was never renewed, right?

    I found this.

    PAUL RYAN ON EXPORT-IMPORT BANK: “I WANT TO GET RID OF IT”

    • #10
  11. Spin Coolidge
    Spin
    @Spin

    Mike H:I don’t follow the news that closely, what are his conditions?

    Mike!

    • #11
  12. Mike H Coolidge
    Mike H
    @MikeH

    Spin:

    Mike H:I don’t follow the news that closely, what are his conditions?

    Mike!

    Spin!

    • #12
  13. Spin Coolidge
    Spin
    @Spin

    Mike H:

    Spin:

    Mike H:I don’t follow the news that closely, what are his conditions?

    Mike!

    Spin!

    Mike!

    • #13
  14. Eric Hines Inactive
    Eric Hines
    @EricHines

    Aaron Miller: Trust is in short supply these days.

    Especially toward the “Freedom” Caucus, who demand their way or nothing.

    Yes, they bleat about just wanting their voices heard.  Their actions, though, say they want their voices heard only their way.

    Eric Hines

    • #14
  15. Frank Soto Contributor
    Frank Soto
    @FrankSoto

    Mike H:

    Sabrdance: And I don’t think some concessions on his own regarding say immigration or the ex-im bank would be uncalled for.

    Is Ryan pro Ex-Im bank? That was never renewed, right?

    I found this.

    PAUL RYAN ON EXPORT-IMPORT BANK: “I WANT TO GET RID OF IT”

    No, but Boehner also scuttled it, as well as comprehensive immigration reform yet huge numbers of Republicans are convinced that he was simply buying his time to betray them at a later date.

    • #15
  16. Jordan Wiegand Inactive
    Jordan Wiegand
    @Jordan

    Sabrdance:I would rather the condition be “don’t use the Motion to Vacate the Chair until January 2017” than “eliminate the Motion to Vacate the Chair.” And I don’t think some concessions on his own regarding say immigration or the ex-im bank would be uncalled for. Otherwise, I find them reasonable.

    These are the details we would need to evaluate the reasonability.

    The motion to vacate reform seems on its face reasonable.  But that’s small potatoes.  The legislative agenda is where the real arguments are to be had.

    • #16
  17. captainpower Member
    captainpower
    @captainpower

    http://www.c-span.org/video/?c4555965/ryan-statement-gop-conference (6 minutes)

    via

    http://paulryan.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=398406 (has transcript)

    My summary from memory:

    He said he’s only taking the job if everyone wants him. If some people don’t want him, then nevermind. Also, since he never wanted the job, he’s going to do it his way – less travel time away from his family.

    Because of his family, he still doesn’t want to do it, but he is trying to weight that against whether it will ultimately be better for his family if he does it.

    • #17
  18. Mike H Coolidge
    Mike H
    @MikeH

    Spin,

    Daily news is 99.9% noise. Full of sound and fury, signifying nothing. It’s not worthy as an intellectual pursuit and not worthy of our time. Being “informed” on the current news gets us nowhere. It doesn’t change the outcome of anything. It causes wild fluctuations in emotions and makes people like Claire depressed. People think that it somehow makes someone a better person because they waste their time learning about current events, most of which won’t matter a couple weeks from now, and almost certainly won’t make a difference in a couple years.

    If you care about what’s going on in the world, read history books, not the newspaper.

    • #18
  19. Mike LaRoche Inactive
    Mike LaRoche
    @MikeLaRoche

    Hell no.

    • #19
  20. Titus Techera Contributor
    Titus Techera
    @TitusTechera

    I think you mean to say, Thank you, sir! May I have another!

    • #20
  21. Aaron Miller Member
    Aaron Miller
    @AaronMiller

    Mike H: If you care about what’s going on in the world, read history books, not the newspaper.

    Or read Ricochet.

    • #21
  22. Frank Soto Contributor
    Frank Soto
    @FrankSoto

    It would be hilarious if Boehner just remains speaker for another year because the freedom caucus wants him gone, but won’t accept any replacements.

    • #22
  23. Nyadnar17 Inactive
    Nyadnar17
    @Nyadnar17

    Gangsta.

    If anything this move makes me want him as Speaker more.

    • #23
  24. LilyBart Inactive
    LilyBart
    @LilyBart

    “forcing hard-line conservatives…”

    Why is it that far left Democrats are never called “hard-line” leftists?

    • #24
  25. Frank Soto Contributor
    Frank Soto
    @FrankSoto

    LilyBart:

    “forcing hard-line conservatives…”

    Why is it that far left Democrats are never called “hard-line” leftists?

    Lost of us call them hard line (or worse).  The media doesn’t.  But you know why that’s the case.

    • #25
  26. Titus Techera Contributor
    Titus Techera
    @TitusTechera

    Nyadnar17:Gangsta.

    If anything this move makes me want him as Speaker more.

    People love a bad boy-

    • #26
  27. Umbra Fractus Inactive
    Umbra Fractus
    @UmbraFractus

    He’s basically telling the Freedom Caucus that if they want concessions they have to give something in return. Seems perfectly reasonable to me.

    • #27
  28. James Gawron Thatcher
    James Gawron
    @JamesGawron

    Peter,

    I agree with his concept. All three caucuses should be in agreement and should endorse the speaker. However, I’m not convinced that Ryan is the guy. Let him explain what he wants to do to the Freedom Caucus. I’m a bit tired of the inside the beltway naked co-option option.

    I’m in no rush.

    Regards,

    Jim

    • #28
  29. Bob L Member
    Bob L
    @

    Are people aware of the demands other than; Support of the major caucuses, elimination of motion to vacate, and time with his family?

    None of these are actually substantive positions.

    • #29
  30. captainpower Member
    captainpower
    @captainpower

    LilyBart: He doesn’t want the job.  Accept this and move on.

    Reminds me of some advice I read about how to manage the “too much work” problem.

    Don’t turn down clients; just tell them the amount of cash that would make it worth your while. If they say no, you win. If they say yes,  you win.

    • #30

Comments are closed because this post is more than six months old. Please write a new post if you would like to continue this conversation.