Here's a statement of the obvious: The opinions expressed here are those of the participants, not those of the Mutual Fund Observer. We cannot vouch for the accuracy or appropriateness of any of it, though we do encourage civility and good humor.
One point I touched on in December was that a dramatic market fall might well be occasioned by the group that the St. Louis Post-Dispatch decried as "the toddlers running Congress." In a 2011 tantrum, the House refused to raise the US debt ceiling which cost the stock market a trillion dollars in one day.
CNN's update:
House Republicans are plotting tactics for their new majority and weighing how to use their leverage to enact a laundry list of demands, with many zeroing in on an issue with enormous economic implications: Raising the nation’s borrowing limit.
It’s an issue confronting House GOP Leader Kevin McCarthy ... more than two dozen House GOP lawmakers laid out their demands to avoid the nation’s first-ever debt default, ranging from new immigration policies to imposing deep domestic spending cuts. And several Republicans flatly said they would oppose raising the borrowing limit even if all their demands were met.
There are two interesting arguments that I've encountered lately. (1) A real "red wave" or a real "blue wave" either would have been better because a razor-thin majority leaves the leadership hostage to their most adamant members - Joe Manchin ruled the Senate and the Freedom Caucus might rule the House. And (2) the House Democrats could blow the entire calculus out of the water by convincing just five Republicans to vote with them in favor of a retired Republican member of the House as speaker. The speaker doesn't have to be a current member and an adult conservative - Paul Ryan, John Kasich, Bob Goodlatte - might disable both ends. Which couldn't happen because, you know, 2024, "the base" fund-raising efforts dependent on demonization ...
Assuming that non-current member is chosen as the speaker do they: A) Have a tie breaking vote? B) Stand as #3 in line to become president should that become necessary?
All of this is fascinating... I had no idea that a "non-current member" could be chosen as the speaker. Does the term "non-current member" mean that the individual must have previously been a member, or does it mean that anyone at all can be chosen as speaker?
Article I, section 2 of the Constitution directs that the House choose its Speaker and other officers. The Speaker is the only House officer who traditionally has been chosen from the sitting membership of the House. Manual Sec. 26. The Constitution does not limit his selection from among that class, but the practice has been followed invariably.
This would seem to suggest that it's at least theoretically possible under the Constitution for a non-member to be elected as speaker. It sheds no light at all on Mark's fascinating questions.
Comments
CNN's update: There are two interesting arguments that I've encountered lately. (1) A real "red wave" or a real "blue wave" either would have been better because a razor-thin majority leaves the leadership hostage to their most adamant members - Joe Manchin ruled the Senate and the Freedom Caucus might rule the House. And (2) the House Democrats could blow the entire calculus out of the water by convincing just five Republicans to vote with them in favor of a retired Republican member of the House as speaker. The speaker doesn't have to be a current member and an adult conservative - Paul Ryan, John Kasich, Bob Goodlatte - might disable both ends. Which couldn't happen because, you know, 2024, "the base" fund-raising efforts dependent on demonization ...
A) Have a tie breaking vote?
B) Stand as #3 in line to become president should that become necessary?
On the other hand, Speaker Pro Tempore must be a member.
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/GPO-HPRACTICE-108/html/GPO-HPRACTICE-108-35.htm
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speaker_of_the_United_States_House_of_Representatives