335
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 05 Oct 2023
335 points (94.2% liked)
politics
19072 readers
1863 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
It can happen. However, it is generally not done because the House wants to be in charge of itself.
This was the first article I was able to find, as the question has apparently come up as recently as after John Boehner vacated the position: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/can-outsider-be-speaker-house-n441926
" The Constitution is silent on that question, saying simply, "The House of Representatives shall chuse (sic) their Speaker and other Officers."
The Clerk of the House agrees with the office of the House Historian, which says the speaker "has always been (but is not required to be) a House Member."
Most historians and legal experts who've looked at this issue conclude the founders simply assumed the speaker would be drawn from among elected members.
"It would have been unthinkable for the most populous house not to have its leader be part of the representatives who were elected by the people," says David Forte, a constitutional scholar at Cleveland State University.
"Nothing fits that would make the speaker anything other than a member of the house," except for the Constitution's silence on the issue, Forte says, noting that the Articles of Confederation said members of Congress shall have authority "to appoint one of their members to preside." "
Gotta love how the vagueness of the Founding Fathers is cause for serious debate after they just assumed something was obvious.
Welcome to why we have a mass shooting everyday. A comma and poof, no more well regulated required.
The USA was probably the most experienced in writing constitutions at the time, both on a national scale and a state scale. Even then, there wasn't that much experience compared to today and a failure of a state government could easily be corrected by the King. These were smart men trying to create a workable compromise, but they weren't perfect.
They were all educated and well connected, but I think it'd be a stretch to say they were all smart. I don't know if we have enough information to make that claim. I don't like the worship of the founding fathers. They likely weren't particularly special people, but their circumstances were.
I don't think it is hero worship to say they were smart.
We have letters of enough of them to get an idea that they understood and could debate on a wide variety of topics. They were also able to put together a surprisingly stable government at a time when this wasn't guaranteed.
They were all flawed men in their own ways, but I wouldn't call them stupid.