(January 7, 2023 at 8:09 pm)Jehanne Wrote:

(January 7, 2023 at 7:57 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: That is also not correct.

1. Killing legislation via the Rule Committee is not a ‘veto’ in any sense.

2. The MAGAts are three votes out of thirteen. By themselves (which is what you explicitly stated in your earlier post) they are powerless to kill anything.

3. If the three hard-righters stick together and none of the Democrats cross party lines, at least four of the remaining six Republican would need to vote with the MAGAts to stop a bill.

Boru

Here's another source:

Quote:While the motion to vacate has drawn the most attention, McCarthy’s concession related to the House Rules Committee may be the most impactful. Allowing more members of the House Freedom Caucus, most of whom seem to relish chaos and causing a spectacle, on the pivotal committee that determines which bills can make it to the House floor could make a concrete difference on legislators’ ability to perform basic functions.

“Those concessions are pretty huge,” Joshua Huder, a congressional expert with Georgetown University’s Government Affairs Institute, tells TIME. “You’re talking about some very real limitations on what McCarthy can do to manage the House floor.”

https://time.com/6244990/mccarthy-conces...orm-house/

In other words, the MAGA folks can block RINO bills from ever making it to the House floor, unless the RINOs can get a Democrat (somewhat unlikely) to support the legislation.  In this respect, they will be able to exercise a "veto" over moderate bills.

It’s. Not. A. Veto.

Boru

(January 7, 2023 at 8:12 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote:

(January 7, 2023 at 8:09 pm)Jehanne Wrote: Here's another source:


https://time.com/6244990/mccarthy-conces...orm-house/

In other words, the MAGA folks can block RINO bills from ever making it to the House floor, unless the RINOs can get a Democrat (somewhat unlikely) to support the legislation.  In this respect, they will be able to exercise a "veto" over moderate bills.

It’s. Not. A. Veto.

Boru

Quote:veto

2 of 2
verb
vetoed; vetoing
transitive verb

: to refuse to admit or approve : PROHIBIT
also : to refuse assent to (a legislative bill) so as to prevent enactment or cause reconsideration

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/veto

https://www.senate.gov/reference/referen...es_vrd.htm

Vetoes
The power of the President to refuse to approve a bill or joint resolution and thus prevent its enactment into law is the veto. The president has ten days (excluding Sundays) to sign a bill passed by Congress. A regular veto occurs when the President returns the legislation to the house in which it originated, usually with a message explaining the rationale for the veto. This veto can be overridden only by a two-thirds vote in both the Senate and the House. If this occurs, the bill becomes law over the President's objections. A pocket veto occurs when Congress adjourns during the ten-day period. The president cannot return the bill to Congress. The president's decision not to sign the legislation is a pocket veto and Congress does not have the opportunity to override.

(January 7, 2023 at 8:20 pm)arewethereyet Wrote: https://www.senate.gov/reference/referen...es_vrd.htm

Vetoes
The power of the President to refuse to approve a bill or joint resolution and thus prevent its enactment into law is the veto. The president has ten days (excluding Sundays) to sign a bill passed by Congress. A regular veto occurs when the President returns the legislation to the house in which it originated, usually with a message explaining the rationale for the veto. This veto can be overridden only by a two-thirds vote in both the Senate and the House. If this occurs, the bill becomes law over the President's objections. A pocket veto occurs when Congress adjourns during the ten-day period. The president cannot return the bill to Congress. The president's decision not to sign the legislation is a pocket veto and Congress does not have the opportunity to override.

That's why it is (often) a capital 'V'; it can also function as a verb, which is how I used it.

(January 7, 2023 at 8:26 pm)Jehanne Wrote:

(January 7, 2023 at 8:20 pm)arewethereyet Wrote: https://www.senate.gov/reference/referen...es_vrd.htm

Vetoes
The power of the President to refuse to approve a bill or joint resolution and thus prevent its enactment into law is the veto. The president has ten days (excluding Sundays) to sign a bill passed by Congress. A regular veto occurs when the President returns the legislation to the house in which it originated, usually with a message explaining the rationale for the veto. This veto can be overridden only by a two-thirds vote in both the Senate and the House. If this occurs, the bill becomes law over the President's objections. A pocket veto occurs when Congress adjourns during the ten-day period. The president cannot return the bill to Congress. The president's decision not to sign the legislation is a pocket veto and Congress does not have the opportunity to override.

That's why it is (often) a capital 'V'; it can also function as a verb, which is how I used it.

It's a thing the President can do.  I don't care if you use V or v...but excellent attempt at being right.  Fuxxake.  You can't be wrong about anything, can you?

(January 7, 2023 at 8:46 pm)arewethereyet Wrote:

(January 7, 2023 at 8:26 pm)Jehanne Wrote: That's why it is (often) a capital 'V'; it can also function as a verb, which is how I used it.

It's a thing the President can do.  I don't care if you use V or v...but excellent attempt at being right.  Fuxxake.  You can't be wrong about anything, can you?

On many occasions, I've admitted when I have been wrong here, much more often, in fact, than expressing my humanly concern about the mental wellness of my fellow human beings when their own words elicit a genuine concern on my part to express empathy towards and with them.

In any case, McCarthy’s concession to the MAGA creeps was huge, basically, they can now advance their "radical or nothing" approach. No Democrat will support them, which will leave the RINOs powerless unless they can start making deals with the Democrats, and the threats of losing funding and/or sponsorship when everybody runs again in 2024 will put dampers on those initiatives.

And, so, if anyone thought gridlock was bad before, just wait! That's what MAGA wants, an economic and political meltdown, which will propel the Grand Leader back into power in 2024, who will, of course, blame the Democrats when things go south.

@Jehanne is using "veto" in the colloquial and not the legal or legislative sense. If the three can prevent a bill from hitting the floor for debate and voting, yes, in the colloquial sense it certainly is a "veto". In the Constitutional sense, no, it's not.

Pedantry aside, it's a cession of power on McCarthy's part, as he won't be able to push through legislation that he supports, which is one of the main powers a Speaker wields.

I don't think the MAGAts will be able to leverage it much, simply because they're still not the only goods on sale in the shop-window. I don't think it will propel Trump to a second term, either, for entirely unrelated reasons.

Nice to slip in something that has nothing to do with this thread.

You are a saint.

Regardless - a veto is some POTUS can do. full stop.

If MAGA can cause the United States to default on its debt (say, by refusing to pass a spending bill to keep the government running in the name of a "balanced budget"), such could trigger a worldwide depression. Trump will play his usual game of political chicken ("nominate me or I'll run as a third party and sink all of you") to get the nomination, blame the Democrats for any recession/depression and achieve power on economic grounds by running a "Who do you hate less?" campaign.

That isn't a veto or a Veto.