Democrat unveils bill to allow only House members to serve as Speaker

[riversedge]

Good they are doing this--stranger things have happened [like for instance-Trump being elected President!!]


The Senate will have no say in this since it would be House rules IMHO.






Democrat unveils bill to allow only House members to serve as Speaker


https://thehill.com/homenews/house/563758-democrat-unveils-bill-to-only-allow-house-members-to-serve-as-speaker


By Cristina Marcos - 07/19/21 04:27 PM EDT


A new bill introduced on Monday by Rep. Brendan Boyle (D-Pa.) would allow only an elected House member to serve as Speaker after former President Trump called the suggestion that he seek the gavel "so interesting."

The Constitution does not directly state that the House Speaker must be a member of the chamber, but to date, the role has never been filled by an outsider.

Boyle argued that the statute should be made clear, even if electing someone outside of Congress to serve as Speaker remains a long shot. His bill, titled the Mandating That Being an Elected Member Be an Essential Requirement for Speakership Act, would explicitly limit eligibility to current House lawmakers.

"The Speaker of the U.S. House is second in the United States presidential line of succession. That Donald Trump's name would even be tossed around as a potential speaker in the people’s house, should serve as an alarm bell that our current requirements need to be amended in the name of protecting our nation and our democracy," Boyle said in a statement..............................

[dalton99a]

1. A prudent move.

Always assume the worst with that fucker

[lagomorph777]

18. Yup. Keep plugging the holes as best we can.

[SheltieLover]

2. Good!

[unblock]

3. seems unconstitutional on its face

the constitution directly gives the house the power to choose its speaker. i don't see how a law can change that.

and if they mean just a house resolution, then that's useless as the house could reverse that whenever they wanted to make a non-member speaker.

[LiberalArkie]

7. the constitution directly gives the house the power to choose its speaker. - But the constitution

does not require the speaker to even be an American.

[patphil]

10. This is a rule, not a law.

I don't see it being in conflict with the Constitution, since the House is merely establishing a minimum job qualification. It only makes sense that the Speaker of the House be familiar with both the workings of the House and its members.
Of course, as a rule, it can be changed at any time.

[unblock]

13. doesn't even need to be changed. the house can simply ignore it. it's unenforceable.

[EYESORE 9001]

4. I've heard the opinion expressed that Cheeto Benito would never pursue that job seriously

because there’s too much real work involved. I don’t buy that argument for a minute. He’s far too vain to turn it down if the opportunity presented itself. He’d just farm out any arduous tasks to toadies.

[Nasruddin]

11. He doesn't care

What "work" did he do as president?

Eye on the ball - succession to the presidency.

[zuul]

28. And he's too stupid to comprehend the amount of work involved.

Christ, that dumb shit sat in the White House for 4 years. He probably thinks he would get to talk all day if he became ‘Speaker.’ And he loves talking about himself.

[3catwoman3]

5. My husband pointed out that if Trump were to be...

…made Speaker of the House, he would be in line for the presidency.

Having him a speaker wold be bad enough. Being in line to be president again is horrifying.

[Harker]

8. Right.

If he's anywhere on the ladder of succession, everyone on higher rungs would be endangered.

[NurseJackie]

6. Or "MTBAEMBAERFSA" for short.

Boyle argued that the statute should be made clear, even if electing someone outside of Congress to serve as Speaker remains a long shot. His bill, titled the Mandating That Being an Elected Member Be an Essential Requirement for Speakership Act, would explicitly limit eligibility to current House lawmakers.

Or "MTBAEMBAERFSA" for short. Pronounced "mit-bame-barf-sa"

[tritsofme]

9. This bill is about messaging, it appears to have major constitutional problems.

But that’s ok, its not intended to become law, but remind voters that Trump hasn’t gone away ahead of the midterms.

[lagomorph777]

19. How so?

[tritsofme]

22. The Constitution says: "The House of Representatives shall chuse their Speaker"

Limiting the House’s ability to choose their speaker by statute would be constitutionally dicey, to say the least.

[lagomorph777]

23. They can limit their own rules, though.

But I am confused by the concept of a "bill" that doesn't need Senate approval, affects the rules of the House, and likely doesn't need the President's signature either. I think I see what you're getting at.

[tritsofme]

25. The article in the OP discussed a bill, not a House rule change.

That bill would face constitutional issues.

It would be perfectly valid for the House to pass an internal rule that limited the speakership to members, but that rule could be changed by a new majority who wanted to select a non-member as speaker.

[lagomorph777]

26. Yup - either the author of the story in the OP is confused, or the author of the bill is confused.

I am definitely confused.

[sarisataka]

12. The difference a year makes

SMH

ETA- the Speaker would still have to be approved by 5he House members. Does anyone really believe they would select Trump for the position? Will the House have a Republican majority soon?

[lagomorph777]

24. The House will have a permanent Reptilian majority if For The People Act and John Lewis Act fail.

Trouble is, we have 2 or 3 of our donkeys acting like asses. They are protecting the Filibuster instead of protecting Democracy.

[zaj]

14. It's a rule. They can change it back the GOP wants to appoint Trump.

This won't protect anything.

[Liberal In Texas]

15. Good. Hope they get it done. n/t

[wryter2000]

16. If they won the House

Couldn’t they change it back?

[madville]

21. Yes, just a waste of time

They shouldn't even be acknowledging his existence.

[DavidDvorkin]

17. On the other hand, the possibility of Trump as Speaker

Could be the best campaign issue for the Democrats. It could help them retain control of the House.

[onenote]

20. There were DUers promoting the idea of Hillary becoming Speaker

Some of us thought that was a bad (as well as a silly) idea. Glad to see the issue being confronted.

[FBaggins]

27. There's no way to really do that

If it really is a bill then it would have to get past the Senate (and would probably be unconstitutional). If it's just a rule change... then the same new majority that might want to pick someone else... can change the rule right back,