ringwiss
@ringwiss.bsky.social
🏳️🌈 🇪🇺 🇵🇱 🇬🇧 He/him. Armchair parliamentarian. I type at 140 wpm.
The new edition of Erskine May has a whole new part entitled ‘Parliamentary procedure in the novel circumstances of COVID-19 and Brexit’!
ringwiss@ringwiss.bsky.social · 2w agoAnd for anyone looking for early Christmas present ideas…
The Senate has made a real mess of this. 1. They forgot to withdraw the committee-reported amendment and have just ignored it. 2. When cloture was invoked, the chair forgot to rule out of order the pending motion to recommit. (The Record incorrectly lists it as still pending.)
Senate Press Gallery@senatepress.bsky.social · last mo.The Senate has convened... There are two votes at 10:45 a.m. -- 1. Adoption of Cruz-Cantwell substitute amendment #6776 to S.4668, Protect College Sports Act of 2026. 2. Cloture on the underlying bill, S. 4668, Protect College Sports Act of 2026. Further votes are possible.
One of the suprisingly big challenges in British politics is that the role policy wonks think MPs should have (legislators) isnt that the public do (local dignitary/fixer/governor. Delete as needed) And in a democracy the latter wins
Matthew Holehouse@matthewholehouse.bsky.social · last mo.I'd love to see the polling and the party splits on "Is 30 minutes speech writing a better or worse use of MP labour than 30 minutes of casework"
Fun fact: Long ago, adjournment resolutions sometimes gave the *minority* leaders of the two houses the power to call them back into session.
ringwiss@ringwiss.bsky.social · last mo.It would be nice if the House in the next Congress revoked all these powers that the speaker has accumulated over the years, but I’m not holding my breath.
I like the Senate website’s new design, especially the cool photo.
Sometimes Congress passes a bill but forgets to present it to the president, and then the next Congress has to unpass it.
there’s no better shit out there than two homers debating arcane procedural rules
Certainly true in terms of the number of closed rules, and it would be the most productive if not for that one Congress where they allowed suspension of the rules by a simple majority.
In theory, members are required to attend pro-forma sessions, and those who are absent are supposed to have their salary withheld.
More Perfect Union@moreperfectunion.bsky.social · last mo.After today the U.S. House of Representatives is off until after the midterm elections. That's a month and a half paid vacation.
Re avoiding the impeachment vote: In principle, the speaker is required to designate a time for consideration of Massie’s resolution on the next legislative day after today, even if the House is only meeting for a pro-forma session that day. However…
Michael McAuliff@mcauliff.bsky.social · last mo.@reesegorman.bsky.social reports: House GOP leaders considering cancelling votes tomorrow, going home today until after the election. No final decision yet but there's a lot of discussion. They want to avoid a vote tomorrow on the Hegseth impeachment, which is privileged,
Massie went on for over an hour reading his impeachment resolution… Giving notice of your intent to offer a question of privilege has a lot of potential as a method of filibustering (you have to read your resolution in full). It’s only a matter of time before it gets curtailed.
This would be so much more fun if the House hadn’t given the speaker all those unilateral adjournment, recess and postponement authorities.
Jamie Dupree@jamiedupree.bsky.social · last mo.24 House lawmakers missed the first votes of the week on Monday. There were so many Republicans absent - 17 of the 24 - that Democrats technically held the majority on the House floor. Here's the list of the absentees:
While researching this, I came across this magazine article from 1886, ‘Obstacles to Good Legislation’, by Rep. (and future speaker) Reed. I really enjoyed it. The House still suffers from many of the problems he mentions, and his conclusion is very interesting.
ringwiss@ringwiss.bsky.social · 2mo ago– When the idea first came up in the UK House of Commons, it was called ‘clôture’, modelled after the procedure in the French parliament. – After a while, the government began to call it ‘closure’, while opponents continued to use ‘clôture’ to highlight that it was an un-English concept.
“And what if we descend into just an ordinary place, where people use first names, nicknames, ‘you’ or sloppy language and, you know, wear white trainers?”
Aaron Rupar@atrupar.com · 2mo ago"If you are the speaker next year, are you planning to change the rules to allow sneakers?"
Taking up a constitutional amendment under suspension of the rules feels a bit tacky, like making a major purchase on your phone.
This is good, and they should do it this way more often. Urgent questions and statements take up so much time that if the timings for the main business are set with reference to the moment of interruption, you often end up with only two or three hours left for the report stage of a major bill.
Congress: “Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled” Parliament:
Ftr, there absolutely were instances during Pelosi’s time as the Democratic leader (even in the later years) when members of the minority cast decisive votes in favour of the majority’s special rules.
Jake Grumbach@jakemgrumbach.bsky.social · 2mo agoPelosi: "Voting for the rule is something that I, as Speaker, we never — we didn't even consider that anybody would do that. We never had that problem. So I'm disappointed that they did that."
Similarly, a member once proposed ‘permitting the inclusion in the Record of photographs, cartoons, half-tones, rotogravures, portraits, comic strips, and similar material’.
ringwiss@ringwiss.bsky.social · 2mo agoIt’s not so much that you can’t, but rather that the clerks will be annoyed if you do. (🧾 in post below)
It’s not so much that you can’t, but rather that the clerks will be annoyed if you do. (🧾 in post below)
Re scenario (2): the most recent practice has been to deal with the objection immediately, not after the remaining members are sworn in.
Rick Hasen@rickhasen.bsky.social · 2mo ago#ELB: Fearmongering about stealing Congress on January 3, 2027 https://electionlawblog.org/2026/fearmongering-about-stealing-congress-on-january-3-2027/
The way they set this up is fascinating: (1) a unanimous-consent request to make in order a ‘motion to adjourn’ – really a motion to set up pro-forma sessions; (2) a vote on that motion; (3) a unanimous-consent request to *actually* adjourn until the first pro-forma session.
ringwiss@ringwiss.bsky.social · 3mo agoWell, I’ll let you hear it from the presiding officer…