126
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 04 Oct 2023
126 points (97.0% liked)
politics
19244 readers
1948 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 2 years ago
MODERATORS
It's funny because this is the best they've got. Forcing someone to change their secondary office while they're away at a funeral. Real inconvenience to the minority leader's staff. Make America Great Again!
You know what's really hilarious about it?
Pelosi is the one Democrat that didn't vote for his removal, because she's in CA for Dianne Feinstein's funeral. Her absence from the vote actually made McCarthy's job easier, as it meant McCarthy could afford one more defection. But hey, it's all her fault, so let's kick her out of her office. And as supposedly pissed off as the GOP supposedly are with Gaetz, I don't see them shoving his office in a broom closet somewhere for leading the whole movement to oust him in the first place. You'd think if they were going to go after anyone, they'd go after the guy that caused their mess in the first place.
But nope. Not gonna do that. Because the party still needs his vote.
The GOP majority in the house exists because of four people:
That's not hyperbole. If those four people did not exist, we'd be talking about Speaker Hakeem Jeffries right now. The GOP majority literally exists due to the existence of multiple people who are either wholly unqualified for office, suspected of criminal activity that should have them in jail already, or both.
She was supposed to move out 10 months ago. She still has her normal office with every other House Rep in another building.
So no, it's not her office.
You're very opinionated for not reading the article you posted tho
No... she wasn't.
It is her office, or at least it was.
There are a number of unlisted offices that can be assigned. It is customary to allow a Speaker to retain one of these if they leave that role.
Maybe you're the one that should do some actual research?
Right it was...
Then, it wasn't.
She doesn't get to keep it indefinitely, and 10 months seems long enough to move out.
How much longer did you want them to wait?
If that's true, I googled and can only see Pelosi's recent claims:
Well, now there's a new ex-speaker...
How many ex-speakers get an office in the Capitol Building?
Do you think McCarthy and Pelosi should share?
Do we take someone else's office so they can both have one?
Just take two seconds and think about it
There are multiple offices. No one is sharing.
You really don't know what you're talking about. It is a long-standing tradition for the former speaker to maintain an office after their term. Pelosi allowed the speaker before her to maintain an office, for example.
This is just being done out of spite. Petty nonsense.
Mate, we got our representation capped because we ran out of space....
There's not infinite office space in the Capitol Building, that's why House office are in an adjoing building.
It's not rocket appliances
BS. Representation got capped because capping it benefited those in power.
It's easy to allocate more representative to more seats, it's easy to allocate more office space to more representatives - even if it's not necessarily in the same building.
This issue has come up in a multitude of nations, and everyone has managed to solve this puzzle - and you expect people to believe that "the greatest nation on earth" can't do it, because there's apparently a finite amount of fucking office space in America??
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-the-house-got-stuck-at-435-seats/
It can be changed literally whenever....
So you're saying for 113 years now, there's been a grand conspiracy where everyone in DC has agreed to deny Americans accurate representation?
It's capped because of physical space bud. They could telework these days
*But my point was the space in the Capitol Building is finite, it's not a fucking TARDIS. Not every house rep gets an office in that building
They have offices in an adjoing building.
I feel like I'm explaining to my dog the mailman doesn't show up everyday to steal his food, it's an entirely simple concept. There's not space for all 435 to have an office there.
Pelosi is no longer the most recent ex-speaker.
Wow.
You're linking an entire long and insightful article that precisely explains why the number of representatives was capped and that never once mentions that it was because of physical office space - and yet your takeaway is that it was capped because America ran out of office space for its representatives.
Maybe you should work on your reading comprehension?
It's capped because they ran out of seats in the chamber...
My point is that there's finate space. And they won't add more.
Which is why the vast majority of house reps have their offices in an adjoining building.
Why do you think there's just a bunch of empty offices no one are using in the Capitol Building?
Can you point out where you’re seeing the cap based on space? I read your article and it looks like it was capped due to the 1929 Permanent Apportionment Act.
No, it's not.
Why don't you just read the fucking article that you posted? You might learn something.
Are you under the impression there are only two offices in the building?