Holding Congress captive is one thing; it's something else entirely doing that to the American people. He said that "the extreme MAGA Republican agenda that apparently has been negotiated into the House rules" could jeopardize our "health, safety, and general well-being," and
(i)t may undermine national security and a robust defense, and undermine our ability to actually advance an agenda that is anchored in kitchen table, pocketbook issues and not extremism.
He's "going to extend the hand of partnership" to the Rs, and look for common ground whenever and wherever possible - but that can't be one-sided.
We will oppose extremism, of course, whenever necessary. And there are Republicans who are interested in governing. And they're going to have to break from the extreme wings of their party at times around some important issues. And we'll see how that all unfolds.
He and McCarthy "have had some positive, forward-looking conversations" recently, and he hopes they can "agree to disagree without being disagreeable." That's similar to McCarthy's comments upon receiving the gavel.
Finally, on the historical aspect of his leadership role, Jeffries said, in part,
... I do think that it is another data point on the journey in America, which is we are a government of the people, by the people and for the people. And that means that folks from a working-class neighborhood in central Brooklyn like myself should have an opportunity to participate in American governance, particularly in the House of Representatives, which is the institution designed to be the closest to the people.
Rep. Dan Crenshaw (R-TX) - not one of the "MAGA Republicans" Jeffries mentioned - chatted with Jake Tapper on CNN's SOTU.
He talked about last week's activities and his disagreement with the 'anti-Kevin' folks he referred to as 'terrorists.' He apologized anyone he offended, even as he was surprised at how sensitive they were. Crenshaw provided some transparency into why the rest of the caucus was upset.
...before we had taken a single vote in a conference with everyone there, Kevin McCarthy had asked one of the leaders of this group, what else do you want? Let's make this work. What else do you want? And they couldn't answer in that moment. And that was a real turning point for a lot of people. That was what created all of that animosity...
He also said there was no reason to keep voting throughout the week if they didn't have the agreement they wanted.
There was no reason for us to keep voting... keep allowing these speeches that just degraded and diminished and insulted Kevin McCarthy. We didn't have to keep doing that. We could have just adjourned for the whole week and just kept negotiating... And it seemed very, very pointless.
Based on what he knows, Crenshaw agrees with the upcoming rules changes, and said no matter what people might thing, there's not a lot of disagreement on them. He said the changes to start with a budget and build the 12 appropriation bills from there is the right way to do it. He also agrees with members being able to bring amendments to the floor. The process will be "messy. It will be time-consuming..." but it will make all members feel as if their voice matters.
Now, let's hear from Freedom Caucus chair Rep. Scott Perry (R-PA); he talked with George on This Week, and said all the shenanigans last week were about power for the American people.
You know, the American people are very, very tired of this gang of seven, gang of eight, literally seven or eight people, or just a few people in Washington, DC, running all of the policy for the American people. So, when we had a framework of an agreement where the American people can be in charge, when their representatives can actually bring amendments to the floor in good faith, I said, sure, if we can do that, then I'm all in.
What else was included in the "framework of an agreement" they worked out? Accountability, and a budget "that doesn't just continually increase spending," and "single-subject bills."
George, the American people, among other things, are tired of these Christmas tree bills with all these ornaments on them coming for -- in the middle of night, 4,000 pages, $1.7 trillion, 7,200 earmarks. Everything works perfectly for Washington, D.C., but there’s no presents under the tree for the American people... restraining those things and getting those things in order, it's an entire package. It’s not just one thing.
I'm not sure who he thinks those 7.200 earmarks are for - are they just to keep Perry and the rest of them getting elected?
He said they want a debt limit that works to limit our debt; "(w)e can't just keep doing the same thing under the same conditions with the same management and expect different outcomes." Perry said since he's been in Congress - ten years now - the debt has doubled from around $15T to $31.5T.
Finally, Perry doesn't think he should have to forego participating on a committee to "investigate the investigations," as George called it, simply because he's part of the investigation into the insurrection. He asked
why should anybody be limited just because someone has made an accusation? Everybody in America is innocent until proven otherwise. And I would say this, the American people are really, really tired of the persecution and the instruments of federal power being used against them...
I'm suddenly feeling very sleepy, after listening to Perry tell me how exhausted I am.
See you around campus.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Thanks for sharing your thoughts!