That would be THIS post: So, will Frank Guinta (R-NH) vote for “open borders” Paul Ryan for US Speaker of the House?
I got a call from Guinta’s Chief of Staff, Jay. I did think it a little bit amusing that he said “you could have called me” to which my rejoinder was “Not at around midnight, which is when that post went up”. To make this a short post, let’s just say that that Frank is supposed to sit with Paul Ryan next week to “discuss issues”. I asked a simple question: without the spaghgetti code of an omnibus type bill (re: a “Continuing Resolution” or CR, which may be coming up because the Republican majorities in the House AND Senate couldn’t get the job done of “regular order” appropriation / spending bills done) and simply on Principle, would Frank vote against Paul Ryan (R-WI) for Speaker of the US House (and third in line in the Presidency) for his open borders stance, given just the “overwhelming success” of the open borders we’ve had the last decade?
Sidenote: Yes, started under Bush II and gone into overdrive under Obama (er, can it GET more open than what Obama has done?) which is THE reason why I cannot vote for Jeb “Act of Love” Bush for a Bush III Presidency.
He demurred on giving an answer on Guinta’s behalf. But here’s what’s worse – to even consider taking the job (which the Establishment Republicans are all in a tizzy in that he might NOT) he laid out his demands:
- Every faction of the Republicans in the House must support him, or he doesn’t run.
- A return to “regular order” where all proposed bills must come through committees first. Only Ryan will decide which bills will make it to the floor for a vote. [And what would happen to “close the open border type bills”??? -Skip]
- He will not be responsible for campaigning or raising money. Give that job to someone else, he doesn’t have the time for it.
- Elimination of the “Jefferson rule”, or possible use of motions to “vacate the speaker”. This grants him unlimited power and no-one can challenge his speakership. He rules as dictator for the House and no-one allowed to challenge his authoritarian decisions.
It is that last one that I REALLY have a problem with – all we have seen the last two Administrations is the dismantling the Checks and Balances that keep Government limited and is supposed to compartmentalize authority and power to prevent despotism (even as the overbearing Leviathan of an Executive branch which is allowing that to happen anyways with Congress’s abandonment of its Constitutional responsibilities). And here is Ryan doing even MORE damage to “the system” with his demand. In effect, it gives him the possibility to become the tyrant (at least in the House) that the Founders feared.
So why would these chuckleheads actually go for it? And yes, even when asked on Principle, why would Frank Guinta even entertain it? Again, the deferral of an answer.
So, we have No Answers (the associated group to No Labels)?
Look, these are IMPORTANT questions and have ramifications to us here in NH because even as we say “Screw DC, save NH”, the problem is that DC is an ever-on-the-move blob – tendrils reach up even to here. He’s in Deep Sneakers in this next election (and yes, I mentioned his votes FOR the CRs in the past that raised spending which railroaded him two cycles ago) – WHY wouldn’t a politician already have war-gamed these out and be ready for such simple questions?
Unless that’s already been done and perhaps I am not be the one to hear the answers – that I did not pursue.
