Apparently they are utilizing rules that its majority of those receiving votes, a la the verbiage of the Constitution in reference to Electors voting for President/VP. So yes, any vote not for a person (such as present or just not voting) would reduce the total votes by each non-vote, vote.
Frankly, I hate this shit. If there are 435 members, the majority required should always be 218, regardless of how many votes are actually cast. Hell, I contend that a Speaker approval should require a 2/3 majority. 51% isn't a consensus. All this status quo has produced is further entrenched establishment partisan line toeing. This is about as opposite of what the Founders intended for and desired.
Hell, I contend that a Speaker approval should require a 2/3 majority
Be careful there. The kind of wheeling and dealing you selling your soul that would be needed to do to get some of the Dems on board just to elect a speaker would destroy everything.
Or no need to wheel and deal. Just a GOOD candidate, one the overwhelming majority can respect, despite disagreeing opinions. After all, the Speaker in reality, doesn't hold that much power, or at least shouldn't... just the officer tasked with presiding over proceedings to maintain order. Of course the optics of power have grown seemingly every year for decades... an unfortunate development, imo.
But the PEOPLE deserve consensus, not 51% bullying from either party. Ensuring that, requires better rules in place.
If these assholes in DC can't govern like rational adults, and can't figure out a way to find a consensus Speaker, then WE deserve for the government to remain powerless.
There is still ways to go before we can have a clean government where everyone puts their constituents first and act in good faith. Until then, the show must go on.
But doesn't every present reduce that number by one ?
Apparently they are utilizing rules that its majority of those receiving votes, a la the verbiage of the Constitution in reference to Electors voting for President/VP. So yes, any vote not for a person (such as present or just not voting) would reduce the total votes by each non-vote, vote.
Frankly, I hate this shit. If there are 435 members, the majority required should always be 218, regardless of how many votes are actually cast. Hell, I contend that a Speaker approval should require a 2/3 majority. 51% isn't a consensus. All this status quo has produced is further entrenched establishment partisan line toeing. This is about as opposite of what the Founders intended for and desired.
Be careful there. The kind of wheeling and dealing you selling your soul that would be needed to do to get some of the Dems on board just to elect a speaker would destroy everything.
Or no need to wheel and deal. Just a GOOD candidate, one the overwhelming majority can respect, despite disagreeing opinions. After all, the Speaker in reality, doesn't hold that much power, or at least shouldn't... just the officer tasked with presiding over proceedings to maintain order. Of course the optics of power have grown seemingly every year for decades... an unfortunate development, imo.
But the PEOPLE deserve consensus, not 51% bullying from either party. Ensuring that, requires better rules in place.
If these assholes in DC can't govern like rational adults, and can't figure out a way to find a consensus Speaker, then WE deserve for the government to remain powerless.
There is still ways to go before we can have a clean government where everyone puts their constituents first and act in good faith. Until then, the show must go on.