The game theory of the Republican speakership crisis

As Kevin-McCarthy shifted on October 3, the monastery for more than two months does not include speakers. This tells you about the state of the Republican Party and the impact on the right-year election, and note that this content is actually paying attention to Silver Bulletin. However, this situation is evolving vigorously, and components are growing.

As a result, I propose a fairly detailed test for the first person who can assume the first person to graffit on this theme: Matt Glasman, A senior researcher at the University of George Town. Glasman is a specialist in parliamentary procedures and has been involved in his job for 10 years. He is still a bridge and poker player, and has a wonderful book, "Five Mat Points." In fact, I know that the situation is easy to change, but I believe that the huge share of this analysis will be a live long, no matter how many days it will expire, no matter how many days it will expire.

Thank you for reading, and please subscribe without being shy! My politicians pay when others are reported for silver breaking news, and the existence of more subscribers is to simplify such guests. It is. -net

Now, a slightly unusual luggage is happening at Adept's house.

Yesterday, a voting for choosing a new chairman was held at the Adept Congress. All 212 Democrats voted for adept of Kakim Jeffris, a minority. Jim Jordan (Ohio), a candidate from the Republican Party, won 200 votes. Twenty votes were assigned to seven candidates from the Republican Party.

The chair was not elected because no one had gained a majority. Patrick McGenley (North Carolina), a shor t-term chairman, immediately announced the suspension of parliamentary management and began r e-voting. Jordan and his supporters collected enough votes to return to the stage and repeat the voting, but surrendered by 6:30. McGenley returned to the hall, declared the interruption of the nighttime work that night, and in effect, decided to try again the next day.

Yesterday's break was more than two weeks later, and the plenary conference has passed the chairman's resolution of 216 to 210 to 216 to 210. Since then, the Republican leader of the plenary conference has not had the opportunity to adjust the candidate. Later, for almost a few weeks of party discussions and applicants, Republican meetings will set the majority of their favorite Steve-Scaris (LA) last Wednesday afternoon for unnecessary voting 113 to 99.

On Thursday night, Sklys withdrawn the candidate and revealed that the lower house could not get enough votes. And there was almost no support from Jordan and former Chairman McCarthy, a rival in the nomination struggle.

All of these are literally due to the majority of the Republican Party, which literally could not be unable to unite. The 15 votes for selecting McCarse in January were the limited number of Republican members, mainly House Freedom Cocus (FCC), and improved the purpose of the committee, the purpose of the committee, and the political system. This is because he did not give the majority in the parliament until McCarthe agreed.

This fragile coalition did not last six months. McCarsey later furious FCC members, opposed to the debt upper limit and the budget formation up to 2024. They prevented the House of Representatives's three bills and prevented the deliberations.

In September, McCarthy resolutely refused the government closure, and in return, when the House of Representatives passed a resolution to continue the work with the cooperation of a superbatanist, it was a feeling of straw. Gets (Florida) proposed a resolution on October 3 on October 3. This was the first time that the House of Representatives had been in the case of this.

What is happening in the lower house? Usually, the Senate is considered to be a space where many parties fight the minority of the vulgarism, suffer from political deadlocks, and a cautious compromise. In the lower house, opposition parties are generally dominant, pursuing a part y-based partial party in a meticulous manner, and in many cases the disagreement within the party is not noticeable. Why can't the number of parties select a leader?

Party divisions, limited power balance, many parliamentary rules and party rules overlapped, and the Republican Party could not form a cautious and procedural coalition. Even if you can elect the president, you will not be able to achieve it now. < SPAN> On Thursday night, Sklys withdrawn the candidate and revealed that the House of Representatives could not get enough votes. And there was almost no support from Jordan and former Chairman McCarthy, a rival in the nomination struggle.

The Speakership is not a prize you win, it’s a coalition you lead

All of these are literally due to the majority of the Republican Party, which literally could not be unable to unite. The 15 votes for selecting McCarse in January were the limited number of Republican members, mainly House Freedom Cocus (FCC), and improved the purpose of the committee, the purpose of the committee, and the political system. This is because he did not give the majority in the parliament until McCarthe agreed.

This fragile coalition did not last six months. McCarsey later furious FCC members, opposed to the debt upper limit and the budget formation up to 2024. They prevented the House of Representatives's three bills and prevented the deliberations.

In September, McCarthy resolutely refused the government closure, and in return, when the House of Representatives passed a resolution to continue the work with the cooperation of a superbatanist, it was a feeling of straw. Gets (Florida) proposed a resolution on October 3 on October 3. This was the first time that the House of Representatives had been in the case of this.

What is happening in the lower house? Usually, the Senate is considered to be a space where many parties fight the minority of the vulgarism, suffer from political deadlocks, and a cautious compromise. In the lower house, opposition parties are generally dominant, pursuing a part y-based partial party in a meticulous manner, and in many cases the disagreement within the party is not noticeable. Why can't the number of parties select a leader?

The party split, limited power balance, many parliamentary rules and party rules overlapped, and the Republican Party could not form a cautious and procedural coalition. Even if you can elect the president, you will not be able to achieve it now. On Thursday night, Sklys withdrawn the candidate and revealed that the lower house could not get enough votes. And there was almost no support from Jordan and former Chairman McCarthy, a rival in the nomination struggle.

All of these are literally due to the majority of the Republican Party, which literally could not be unable to unite. The 15 votes for selecting McCarse in January were the limited number of Republican members, mainly House Freedom Cocus (FCC), and improved the purpose of the committee, the purpose of the committee, and the political system. This is because he did not give the majority in the parliament until McCarthe agreed.

This fragile coalition did not last six months. McCarsey later furious FCC members, opposed to the debt upper limit and the budget formation up to 2024. They prevented the House of Representatives's three bills and prevented the deliberations.

In September, McCarthy resolutely refused the government closure, and in return, when the House of Representatives passed a resolution to continue the work with the cooperation of a superbatanist, it was a feeling of straw. Gets (Florida) proposed a resolution on October 3 on October 3. This was the first time that the House of Representatives had been in the case of this.

What is happening in the lower house? Usually, the Senate is considered to be a space where many parties fight the minority of the vulgarism, suffer from political deadlocks, and a cautious compromise. In the lower house, opposition parties are generally dominant, pursuing a part y-based partial party in a meticulous manner, and in many cases the disagreement within the party is not noticeable. Why can't the number of parties select a leader?

Asymmetric factional hardball meets a narrow majority

The party split, limited power balance, many parliamentary rules and party rules overlapped, and the Republican Party could not form a cautious and procedural coalition. Even if you can elect the president, you will not be able to achieve it now.

The House of Representatives has great authority. According to the rules of the parliament, the chairman has given a variety of authorities, from the ability to set part of the agenda during the parliamentary meeting to the ability to unilaterally manage physical offices in the parliament building in the parliament hall. There is. The chair can delay vote. The chair may be appointed a meeting committee. Distribute the travel expenses of members of the plenary hall and make a decision on the procedure controversy. You can also secure important staff who may be involved in political conflicts.

However, most of the political authority of the chair does not come from such formal authority. Instead, it depends on the implicit support of most members to maintain the control of the parliament. Without this powerful coalition, the power of the chairman who controls the agenda of the parliament and affects the results of politics will weaken. And everything is because the parliament is originally controlled by the majority. 218 members of the Diet, who have a solid will to do or do something, eventually win the ward. And even the chairman doesn't want to stop them.

AI response to the request "Elephant of the Confused Republican Party"

In modern House of Representatives, the chairman is almost always the majority of the party, and it is possible to gain such respectful support in creating a coalition in procedures. In other words, even if it opposes the actual bill, a member of the Board of Council will also vote for procedures such as bills and the rules of deliberations. They do the benefits from the party, such as appointing the committee, supporting elections, and assistance from other party members when working on their favorite bills, but sometimes they become a bill they oppose. This is because it exceeds the small cost associated with the fact. In the procedure, voting against the party is a serious misconduct.

Instead, the leaders support the back, procure huge amounts of money, develop campaigns, protect party members from complicated voting, formulate party platforms, and negotiate not only between party factions but also with the Senate and President. < SPAN> The House of Representatives has great authority. According to the rules of the parliament, the chairman has given a variety of authorities, from the ability to set part of the agenda during the parliamentary meeting to the ability to unilaterally manage physical offices in the parliament building in the parliament hall. There is. The chair can delay vote. The chair may be appointed a meeting committee. Distribute the travel expenses of members of the plenary hall and make a decision on the procedure controversy. You can also secure important staff who may be involved in political conflicts.

However, most of the political authority of the chair does not come from such formal authority. Instead, it depends on the implicit support of most members to maintain the control of the parliament. Without this powerful coalition, the power of the chairman who controls the agenda of the parliament and affects the results of politics will weaken. And everything is because the parliament is originally controlled by the majority. 218 members of the Diet, who have a solid will to do or do something, eventually win the ward. And even the chairman doesn't want to stop them.

AI response to the request "Elephant of the Confused Republican Party"

In modern House of Representatives, the chairman is almost always the majority of the party, and it is possible to gain such respectful support in creating a coalition in procedures. In other words, even if it opposes the actual bill, a member of the Board of Council will also vote for procedures such as bills and the rules of deliberations. They do the benefits from the party, such as appointing the committee, supporting elections, and assistance from other party members when working on their favorite bills, but sometimes they become a bill they oppose. This is because it exceeds the small cost associated with the fact. In the procedure, voting against the party is a serious misconduct.

Instead, the leaders support the back, procure huge amounts of money, develop campaigns, protect party members from complicated voting, formulate party platforms, and negotiate not only between party factions but also with the Senate and President. The House of Representatives has great authority. According to the rules of the parliament, the chairman has given a variety of authorities, from the ability to set part of the agenda during the parliamentary meeting to the ability to unilaterally manage physical offices in the parliament building in the parliament hall. There is. The chair can delay vote. The chair may be appointed a meeting committee. Distribute the travel expenses of members of the plenary hall and make a decision on the procedure controversy. You can also secure important staff who may be involved in political conflicts.

However, most of the political authority of the chair does not come from such formal authority. Instead, it depends on the implicit support of most members to maintain the control of the parliament. Without this powerful coalition, the power of the chairman who controls the agenda of the parliament and affects the results of politics will weaken. And everything is because the parliament is originally controlled by the majority. 218 members of the Diet, who have a solid will to do or do something, eventually win the ward. And even the chairman doesn't want to stop them.

Enter the Resolution to Vacate the Office of the Speaker

AI response to the request "Elephant of the Confused Republican Party"

In modern House of Representatives, the chairman is almost always the majority of the party, and it is possible to gain such respectful support in creating a coalition in procedures. In other words, even if it opposes the actual bill, a member of the Board of Council will also vote for procedures such as bills and the rules of deliberations. They do the benefits from the party, such as appointing the committee, supporting elections, and assistance from other party members when working on their favorite bills, but sometimes they become a bill they oppose. This is because it exceeds the small cost associated with the fact. In the procedure, voting against the party is a serious misconduct.

Instead, the leaders support the back, procure huge amounts of money, develop campaigns, protect party members from complicated voting, formulate party platforms, and negotiate not only between party factions but also with the Senate and President.

McCarthy's problem in the 118th Congress was that he never had a stable procedural coalition. When he finally won the speaker's post in January, the vote was 216-212 with six incumbent Republicans. The deals he made with the conservative-conservative split gained him enough passive support to get the speakership, but did not give him the strong procedural coalition or distinctions he needed to make deals with Senate Democrats and President Biden. Once McCarthy made these deals, the liberals withdrew their support.

The move stripped the speaker and leadership of their aptitude. The management relies on coalitions to secure special rules votes, and most controversial bills are thus heard in the House. For example, a very conservative defense-budget bill -- a bill that had no chance of passing the Senate and was dominated by mostly conservative members of the House -- could not make it to the House floor after the liberals refused to support it. It was blocked by a coalition of minority Democrats and enough conservative Republicans to give it a majority.

As a result, anyone seeking to become speaker, whether McCarthy, Scully, Jordan, or anyone else, must not only find a way to win a majority in the House of Representatives in the speaker election, but also provide a party agreement that brings the different factions together into a permanent procedural coalition. Without such a stable coalition, a vote under the special rules for bill issuance could fail, because every procedural vote in the House of Representatives is effectively a second vote for the speakership. If the procedural coalition falls apart, so does the speakership.

The Republican Conference rules prove themselves outdated

That is why McCarthy sought Democratic votes to help him when his procedural coalition suffered a meltdown. If Democrats helped McCarthy win the speakership in January, they probably did so by collecting attendance votes, as many observers assumed they could do in exchange for some kind of benefit. If he is not prepared to create a certain coalition of Democrats and procedural majorities, there is no point in enlisting the cooperation of the Democrats at that point. His only way out was to try to make peace with Republican defectors, as well as a resolution on additional speaker powers.

The main mass of the party in the House of Lords has an ideologically diverse set of members according to Begeisbery. Since that is not possible, the two parties are elected from districts with different demographic, industrial, cultural and regional characteristics, showing the range of political positions among the 435 Yankees. One well-known technique is the five families assuming the Republican Party in the House of Lords. These families range from Republicans who are part of a small faction of the bipartisan Problem Solvers Caucus to a tightly limited faction of the House Freedom Caucus. During the 118th Congress, Speaker McCarthy encouraged organized meetings of the five families to achieve consensus among the factions.

Factions within the party compete every time, fighting over internal influence on bills and the selection of politicians in the House of Lords, but if their demands are still not met, there is every possibility that they will resort to political hardline measures, such as withdrawing their own support for party bills or threatening to include the support of the procedural coalition itself. If such generational shifts to intraparty adulterous families were a relatively rare occurrence, they have grown rapidly since 2010.

For example, both parties have seen a surge in members voting against their own party's speaker nominee, something that was literally unheard of 30 years ago. The highlight was when in January, when the House needed a certain number of votes to elect a speaker for the first time in 100 years, Republican factions fought over McCarthy's selection, as Freedom Caucus Republicans adamantly refused to vote for McCarthy while refusing to agree to reduce the speaker's procedural chances and make concessions in the political schema.

Freedom faction supporters daily demonstrate their willingness to take a more solid strategy than supporters of other factions. Nearly all Freedom members regularly vote in favor of all budget and apportionment bills, thereby legitimizing them. They daily criticize their party favorites for compromises with Democrats and legislative deals in jail, and openly oppose the Republican administration. Other Republican factions, while occasionally subject to tough calls, are largely invisible, for example when small "problem-solving" threatens to undermine business execution, and are practically all that the party wanted to control.

This asymmetry gives the Liberals great leverage over the party, because they face real danger of defecting for political and procedural reasons, whereas other groups generally do not. And this reflects their collective antipathy towards the party itself. Whereas Republican House majors, much less minors, look to the party for campaign finance projects and live in constant fear of primaries, Liberal Caucus members are generally seen as less embedded in the regular Republican Party and less dependent on it.

Indeed, the Liberal Caucus' guiding characteristic is its opposition to Republican dominance of the House of Lords. The party leadership literally cannot discipline FCC members and make them loyal to the party, because they would prefer to hold a grudge against the leadership. Undermining their political services, excluding them from negotiations, or publicly labeling them as disloyal to the party, in a restricted media, only strengthens their brand among voters and supporters.

In many cases, the Liberal Caucus is effectively steering politics to the left. Because they are forced to use Democratic votes to pass important spending bills or prevent a government shutdown. By refusing government aid, they can position themselves as genuine and untainted conservatives. When the government has no choice but to side with the Democrats, the Liberals can publicly accuse the Pro-lifers of being ineffectual and unscrupulous. In a sense, the Liberals have no chance of losing, because losing would be another betrayal of the Republicans' mean-spirited management, and this is what they often achieve.

In the 118th Congress, this was more dramatic because the Republican majority in the House was narrow. With a square advantage of 221 to 212, the Republicans could only lose four votes on any issue. This basically means that any party member willing to play a strict game has every chance to control the balance of power in the House of Adepts. And if they control the balance of power, they essentially control the House of Lords.

In fact, it is not surprising that this has increased the ability of the "free" members. However, it is not easy to make more than 20 members promised and complete the execution of corporate strategies, even if they are once "free." However, if only five members need, it is relatively easy to continue to be tough despite political pressure. 1

That's why the 118th parliamentary situation is that the Freedom Cocas supports the Republican Party's established political parties hostage, supports their very narrow Popurist Agenda, who has no prospect of the existing political parties, the Senate and the President of Biden. You will be forced to watch the crows collapsed. -Or do you see the procedure of the procedure collapsed? Concormality is impossible. Do you do what they want, or to work after being screwed into the Democratic Party. At least for them, this is the option of a penalty point. Whether to get their politicians or get a betrayal story.

This happened when voting as a chairman. This happened when the debt maximum agreement was determined. So was the credit bill. And it happened in the shutdown.

These struggles reached the peak on October 3, and Gets, who was angry at McCarthy's shutdown avoidance transaction, made an exaggerated resolution (often called a "holiday motion"). 。 Under the IX Adeptic House of Representatives, all committee members can propose this resolution unilaterally from outer space as a profit issue, and instructions have no way to suspend it.

At the time Getz submitted his own resolution, the majority had no choice but to drag McCarsey from the chairman or support him. The characteristic of this procedure (and other voting in the parliament) is to forcibly force McCarthy to the Democratic Party. 96 % of the Republican members agreed with the savings of McCarsey, and only Gets and the limited Republican members of the other seven were in favor of the dismissal. The only problem is how Democrats vote. They may not "agree", "opposite", "agree", or may not vote. In any composition, these types have substantially determined the fate of McCarsey. It was impossible to lie down. < SPAN> In fact, it is not surprising that this has increased the ability of the "free" members. However, it is not easy to make more than 20 members promised and complete the execution of corporate strategies, even if they are once "free." However, if only five members need, it is relatively easy to continue to be tough despite political pressure. 1

That's why the 118th parliamentary situation is that the Freedom Cocas supports the Republican Party's established political parties hostage, supports their very narrow Popurist Agenda, who has no prospect of the existing political parties, the Senate and the President of Biden. You will be forced to watch the crows collapsed. -Or do you see the procedure of the procedure collapsed? Concormality is impossible. Do you do what they want, or to work after being screwed into the Democratic Party. At least for them, this is the option of a penalty point. Whether to get their politicians or get a betrayal story.

This happened when voting as a chairman. This happened when the debt maximum agreement was determined. So was the credit bill. And it happened in the shutdown.

These struggles reached the peak on October 3, and Gets, who was angry at McCarthy's shutdown avoidance transaction, made an exaggerated resolution (often called a "holiday motion"). 。 Under the IX Adeptic House of Representatives, all committee members can propose this resolution unilaterally from outer space as a profit issue, and instructions have no way to suspend it.

At the time Getz submitted his own resolution, the majority had no choice but to drag McCarsey from the chairman or support him. The characteristic of this procedure (and other voting in the parliament) is to forcibly force McCarthy to the Democratic Party. 96 % of the Republican members agree with the savings of McCarsey, and only Gets and the other seven Republicans have agreed. The only problem is how Democrats vote. They may not "agree", "opposite", "agree", or may not vote. In any composition, these types have substantially determined the fate of McCarsey. It was impossible to lie down. In fact, it is not surprising that this has increased the ability of the "free" members. However, it is not easy to make more than 20 members promised and complete the execution of corporate strategies, even if they are once "free." However, if only five members need, it is relatively easy to continue to be tough despite political pressure. 1

That's why the 118th parliamentary situation is that the Freedom Cocas supports the Republican Party's established political parties hostage, supports their very narrow Popurist Agenda, who has no prospect of the existing political parties, the Senate and the President of Biden. You will be forced to watch the crows collapsed. -Or do you see the procedure of the procedure collapsed? Concormality is impossible. Do you do what they want, or to work after being screwed into the Democratic Party. At least for them, this is the option of a penalty point. Whether to get their politicians or get a betrayal story.

This happened when voting as a chairman. This happened when the debt maximum agreement was determined. So was the credit bill. And it happened in the shutdown.