All Episodes
Previous Next
Jan. 9, 2023 - Doug Collins Podcast
24:44
What was all the Fuss about? Behind the Curtains look at the Speakers race
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Hey everybody, I don't know about you, but as you've watched out over the world, the war in Russia and Ukraine is not just isolated to Eastern Europe.
It's spread all over the world and you can see it in market instabilities.
You can see it here.
People who do not think that that war is affecting you, all you gotta do is look at gas prices.
You look at your food prices.
You see the global change that has happened.
But you know something that's also affected investments as well, and I've said all along, Legacy Precious Metals is your navigator.
They're the ones that see you through to get to the next level.
The good news about this is, even with market volatility, market instability, you've got options.
And gold prices are rising as investors turn to gold, and gold presents a hedge against this inflation and that protects you against the weakening dollar, which we are seeing.
Legacy Precious Metals is the only company I trust to deal with gold and silver and the other precious metals.
You need this investment.
You need this as part of your portfolio to keep you buffered from what we're seeing in the world.
War and volatility in the market.
This is where you need to be.
Call Legacy Precious Metals today.
Be proactive about this.
Get on board with it.
Call them at 866-528-1903. 866-528-1903.
Or you can download their free investor's guide at LegacyPMInvestments.com. LegacyPMInvestments.com.
Your navigator in a volatile world of investments.
You want to listen to a podcast?
By who?
Georgia GOP Congressman Doug Collins.
How is it?
The greatest thing I have ever heard in my whole life.
I could not believe my ears.
In this house, wherever the rules are disregarded, chaos and mob rule.
It has been said today, where is bravery?
I'll tell you where bravery is found and courage is found.
It's found in this minority who has lived through the last year of nothing but rules being broken, people being put down, questions not being answered, and this majority say, be damned with anything else.
We're going to impeach and do whatever we want to do.
Why?
Because we won an election.
I guarantee you, one day you'll be back in the minority and it ain't gonna be that fun.
Hey everybody, you know, look, this week is, this past week has been one of those weeks that will, you know, undoubtedly go down in the history books.
For listening to this podcast, you know I try to give you every insight that I can.
And this past week, I have kept you up to date with what's going on in the speakers race.
As I tape this, there's still continual dysfunction in the house as far as to actually, will there be a speaker?
Now, they're trying to get that reconciled.
It may happen even before I finish this podcast or after, but it's somewhere short.
But it could go through the weekend.
So again, we're dealing here on the weekend, dealing with this, getting ready for a new week.
I wanted to get you started off.
With some understanding, because the one thing I have been a part of this past week, and I'm so thankful for all of you in the Doug Collins Podcast group, who you go to the DougCollinsPodcast.com, you hit that email, you let me know what's going on.
You were sharing the podcast.
We're thankful for that.
And one of the things this past week has come up is I've been doing a lot of media discussing the inner workings of stuff that's not normally discussed.
And here's the thing.
Folks, I've been in these rooms.
I've watched this happen for the last 10 to 12 years in different ways, different functions, different formats.
Now, as I've said before in a previous podcast, I'm going to get to a little bit more of this understanding.
There's a lot of people now figuring out that from the beginning of...
Really, the 2010 election cycle.
There has been a brewing discontent in the House among very conservative members, not as conservative members.
And again, I hate to even use those words because it's not really about the goal.
It's about the tactics used to get the goal and what they believe the best methods are for those goals.
So there's been a lot of things thrown around, most of which, frankly, is amazingly off from media people who cover the House of Representatives every week.
I mean, it just it just boggles the mind to think that these folks have covered the body for this long.
And, you know, frankly, still don't understand the body.
It just goes to show you, frankly, that the media is a very much moment of headline driven.
What can I get out?
What can I tweet?
What can I get you to clickbait on?
And I think this is the part that is very frustrating to many people because as we've talked about here on the podcast before, part of the issue here is that those in places of power or asking for power have not been completely honest in what they can and cannot do.
I go back to many examples we've talked about here on the podcast.
One being that, you know, the idea that you can balance the budget tomorrow, conceivably, intellectually, in a lab environment with sterile, you know, no inputs, outputs going on.
Could you possibly do that?
Yeah.
Yeah.
But what you take away and what you don't talk about is the cost of doing that.
Now, I am for balancing the budget.
I'm for working on getting our debt down.
The problem is how you do that and how we understand the problems and workings of our federal government is really what's keeping us from it.
So, again, simply to say, oh, we're going to balance the budget tomorrow.
No, you're not.
Because you're not willing to take the pain.
This is the only thing I'm saying.
To do what it takes to be done to balance the budget tomorrow is more pain than any member of Congress would ever, ever, ever want to inflict on the American people.
We've just got ourselves into that bad a fix.
It's like a person who has never exercised before a day in their life being told the next day you're going to have to run a marathon under two hours.
They'll die, or they'll never get there.
I mean, this is just where we're at.
So, some of the things that I've been hearing is really interesting.
One of the first I want to take on, and here on this, starting out this new week, this Monday, I want to give you some things that what you heard last week And hopefully it's not continuing into when you hear this podcast.
But if it still is, I wanted to give you these parameters and also a chance to look back because I want you to be prepared for what some of the outcome of some of the quote concessions that Kevin McCarthy is giving to get this role of speaker if he actually gets it.
The first is this.
I hear all the time, and there was a lot of discussion last week about, oh, there could be a Democrat elected speaker.
No, there will not.
There is not.
And there was, again, this is so lazy of the press that You know, is there a conceivability that somehow somebody messes up, not enough people come to the floor, and all of a sudden you get a Democrat who has the majority of those voting?
Conceivably, could I work a scenario up?
Yes.
Is it gonna happen?
No.
Okay, it's just not.
So, for all these people saying, you know, the Republicans who were causing all this trouble and the 20 who were against Kevin McCarthy, all they were doing was possibly giving the speakership to a Democrat, you're just wrong.
Okay?
Conceivably, it could happen just like it could snow in July in Georgia.
This is not going to happen.
Okay?
It's just not.
So as you look at these kind of things, these are the kind of things that I want to start pointing out, because some of what's been talked about is things that can actually change the way Congress works, some of which are not bad things.
And they're needed things.
Where I think most have looked at over these past few days and saw the problem coming up is when you were asking for specific members to possibly be specific leaders, possibly even gavel holders, chairman, subcommittee chairman, those kind of things.
That's when you move away from the, quote, policies of the House and move it to we're doing this because we want something.
Now, I'm a big believer that Republicans have got to get away from any idea that you can just throw up roadblocks or temper tantrums, whatever you want to call it, and get what you want, especially a personal game.
If there is issues of process, issues of things that actually affect the way the House could work or could work better, I think there are ways to go about that.
But, okay, I can live with the idea that you want to see things change better than I can live with the fact that I want to be on specific committees.
Now, what has been said is, is those can actually change the way we have.
So let's start off with the first one.
The number of members of the Rules Committee.
Probably the most misunderstood committee in the United States House.
It is called the Speaker's Committee for a reason.
It is the only committee that no matter what the split of the United States House is, it is split nine to four, meaning nine majority members, five minority members.
So it's 13 members, nine and five.
As you can tell right there, if the majority sticks together, which is what is supposed to happen, the minority can never win a vote in the Rules Committee.
It's just physically impossible.
I was there four years on the Rules Committee.
I only saw one time in which there was a possibility that enough Republicans could agree, and it was an amendment...
That, you know, that was frankly thrown in by the Democrats that they didn't really want, but they wanted just to see if they could, you know, taunt Republicans to get it.
And it was close, and it was probably the closest vote I'd ever seen on rules.
I think we were six to five or seven to five.
And we had a couple of our members actually leave and not vote on that bill.
So, again, it just doesn't happen.
Now, what is asked for by Chip Roy and some of the others is to have, again, this is an interesting play.
They wanted four seats of the nine.
Four of the nine majority seats on the rules committee.
Now McCarthy, you know, unless something changes is only agreed, at least it looks in principle to two of those seats.
And then I've heard from the media and I've also heard from some of the members who are requesting these seats that that means that they could stop bad bills.
Well, folks, let me just tell you, that is true if depending on your perspective.
But the only way they can do that, the only way that two members on a rules committee, or four members, if it would be easier, but still two members, could result in that, is that to actually combine with the Democrats on the committee to stop the bills.
Now, the House, as I've said, More often than I can fathom on this podcast, the House is a majority-run body.
If the House cannot pass a bill, it is the majority's fault.
It is the Speaker's fault.
It's the majority leader's fault.
It's the majority whip's fault.
It is not the minority's fault.
Period.
End of statement.
Get over it.
If they can't pass a bill, it's because they can't get 218 votes.
And In the Committee on Rules, which decides, maybe back up and say, this is where it decides how bills get to the floor and what amendments are made in order.
Now, what has happened unfortunately over the last 12 years, and I agree with Chip Roy and many others, we've made amendments almost impossible to get on the floor.
Especially from members not of the committee.
I tend to have a problem with members of the Committee of Jurisdiction, where these bills came from, wanting to then come to the Rules Committee and make an amendment.
You had that opportunity in your committee setting, and if you couldn't get your own enough members or your own party there to vote for it, then you're gonna probably have a problem on the floor anyway.
But if you're not on, say, the Judiciary Committee, and there's a Judiciary Committee bill, then I think, yeah, you should have an opportunity to offer an amendment.
I mean, I think you have to look at how you structure them.
It's make sure we don't have duplicate amendments.
This is what the Rules Committee is for.
Unfortunately, the Rules Committee over the past, you know, 10 or 11 years has become mainly a committee for the Speaker and leadership to determine what they want to do, how they want to do it, and they run it to the floor.
Some of this is good.
Okay, there is room for dissent in the, should be, for the Rules Committee, but I'll tell you, it's not called the Speaker's Committee for no reason.
Because, again, at the end of the day, bills and legislation have to move forward, but we've got to figure out a better way to do it.
So just to be very aware here, just putting two members of an organization or a group or affiliated with them on the Rules Committee will not stop and will not approve amendments.
If the other seven on the Rules Committee vote for it, the only way they can stop it is in line with Democrats to stop bills.
And we're talking about appropriations bills, immigration bills.
We're talking about, you know, debt ceiling bills, if they wanted to try it.
Now, again, the Democrats can also just say, hey, we're going to put this in and be done with it, and we're not going to vote with you so you get left out.
But is it a voice on the Rules Committee?
Yes.
So that's your issue with the Rules Committee.
Is there some people that are upset about this?
Yes.
This is one of the areas where most people say, and again, matter of perspective, this will be where Kevin McCarthy is giving up the most control of the speakership in determining what comes to the floor.
I do know this is going to be hard for some of the Rules Committee members to adapt to if this actually does go through, but we'll see how this rolls in the future because there are going to be times that the Rules Committee Has to get things to the floor.
It may run in contradiction to some of the other rules we're getting ready to talk about.
So we'll leave that at that.
Number two, we're often talked about, one of the rules is talked about as a 72-hour bill.
That's been almost in every rules package for the last little bit that you need to have time to read bills before they come in for.
I'm all in favor of this, okay?
This one is one that I just, again...
I don't quite get why we continue to fall in lumber over this one.
But really, if you want a leadership-based house, then you don't want this rule because that means you can put the omnibus bill, you can put up immigration, you can put up guns, you can put it up with nobody ever having to read it, not even coming through regular order, which regular order is a whole different issue for another day.
But in looking at this, I want you to understand, the reason the 72-hour bill is not done is that either leadership can't get it done, they can't get their 218 members, It's controversial.
They don't want it lingering out there.
They don't want the general public to start weighing in.
They don't want people to start calling in.
So to me, this is actually a good bill because it forces the leadership of the Republican Party to stick to an idea, put it out there, and then either offer amendments, fix it, or get it done.
Now, is this going to be messy at times?
Yeah, it can be, especially if you get lazy and don't do your job, or you can't get your members to agree.
Now, this is something to understand.
Again, leadership sometimes is bound by the fact that they can't get 218 votes.
And if it's a spending bill, if it's a continuing resolution or something that ends up with a shutdown or a debt ceiling issue, look, this is going to be a problem.
Now, in every other bill, most of those bills have no...
Okay, if you don't pass a gun bill, okay, you just don't pass a gun bill.
If you don't pass an immigration bill, you don't pass an immigration bill.
You can get the 72 hours.
We've got to get back to this.
I actually think this is a good amendment, so good rules change.
The question will be is you can also rave that rule requirement in rules.
Thus, going back to the Rules Committee here for a minute.
And then it goes to the floor and everybody would vote on that.
So, again, some of this is not just the Speaker having to do this.
This is actually people on the floor going along with it.
All 222 members of the Republican Conference.
So, look, I am peeling back the shades here, folks.
I am showing you the ugly, dirty secrets of why some of this works, why some of it doesn't work.
And as we go, the third thing I want to hit for you quickly is this idea of all 12 appropriations bills coming in the floor.
I am fully in favor of that.
Completely.
It needs to happen.
In fact, if the Republicans can't do it and then get it to the Senate, no matter what the Senate does, it doesn't matter.
House needs to do their job.
That means taking every appropriations bill and the majority, or again, I can't go back to this enough, the majority get 218 votes, they bring it to the floor, and they pass it.
Or they bring it to the floor without enough members of 218, but they have enough Democrats to pass it.
Maybe it's the majority of the majority that, you know, you agree to, which I think something has also been discussed.
But if you can't get those bills to the floor, then, you know, it doesn't matter, you know, if you're going to, quote, chime out on regular order.
You've got to be willing to get these bills out of the floor and then on to the floor.
Then they've also asked for basically any amendments on the floor on appropriation bill.
Okay, fine.
But let me tell you the other side of that.
That means that you're going to have some members who will put votes up that are simply, and Democrats could do this as well, to simply put Democrats or Republicans in bad positions.
They're simply political statements that are not ever going to get put into law.
They're not ever going to get adopted.
They're not ever going to go through a screening with the two bills from the Senate, but they will put it.
And this could go on guns.
This could go on immigrants.
This could go on.
I mean, you just name the bill.
Democrats will be waiting, waiting for amendments to force Republicans into roll call votes on issues that are sensitive, especially those members that are in Biden-held districts upcoming in 2024. And theoretically, is that a good idea to let anybody just come and put amendments on the floor for the House?
Yeah.
Or to take down amendments that actually cut budget?
Yes.
But the reality is, this is why you have appropriations, why you bring all amendments in at the same time.
You are able to look at these, study these, and figure out what they would do, especially in a spending bill.
This is going to present an interesting issue.
I think the last time that the Republicans actually tried an open rule on a budget process, they lasted a week and there was hundreds of amendments.
And people were so exhausted after that time, even the ones who were asking for it began to say, maybe this isn't a good idea.
But is it possible?
Yes.
Let's also look at one.
One has got me, and they finally started clarifying this, this term limits issue.
Put term limits on the floor.
Put balanced budget on the floor.
These are amendments.
These are not bills.
So let me just be very frank with you.
For those out there who think term limits are the solution to everything, There's an amendment to the Constitution, number one.
It's not just a simple majority vote.
Even if you had a simple majority vote on a bill to ban term limits, it's unconstitutional by the Supreme Court.
It's been ruled this way for a long, long time.
Okay?
So it's got to be a constitutional amendment, which means that you have to get two-thirds on the House floor to actually vote for it.
Guess what?
Ain't happening.
Is it a good fun exercise to do for those who promised it?
Yeah, go at it.
Is it going to change the shape of the world?
No, it's not.
Not until there's two-thirds of the body willing to put a constitutional amendment, which, by the way, also has to go to the Senate for the same kind of rule.
Folks, I need you to understand this.
I'm not saying term limits.
You make your own determination about term limits.
I have my own discussion about term limits.
I think there's problems with them.
Especially when you deal with staffers, life staffers, you deal with committee staffers, you deal with bureaucracies that don't have to worry about an elected official.
Especially in one of the latest, I saw three terms, that's six years.
Most members cannot even get to the point of viable functioning on a lot of the issues in Congress in three terms.
They just don't.
And if you want to email me about that, fine.
Go right ahead.
I can show you.
That that doesn't happen.
So, but anyway, totally different, you know, but this is a discussion you need to understand.
Just because they vote on a term, or get a vote on a term limit amendment, doesn't mean it's going to pass.
In fact, more than likely, it's going to fail.
Warning you now.
All right.
One of the last things that comes up is the steering committee.
Now this is where I began to have, especially because a steering committee deals with individual members and their committeeships.
And this is where I began to have a real problem.
And to understand, I'm not sure the steering committee process is the best process.
It's probably not, but each of the steering committee members, including leadership, are all elected by the different members.
Steering committees have a member for a certain number of states, a certain number of members.
So in other words, if you have District 5, so to speak, and it may cover three states, and all of them equal out to about 20 members of the majority.
20 to 25. Depending on where you may live, you will get together with the other members from those states, and you will elect somebody to be your advocate in the room to get on a committee or not get on a committee.
Okay?
And so you have about 30 members of the committee.
This has been changed a couple times.
Paul Ryan reduced the...
Influence of the Speaker by reducing some of the votes.
And if the Speaker holds, he holds, I think, five votes now.
Israel else has one.
Other leadership have, I think, three.
The majority leader has three.
So, again, it's still leadership-centric.
I mean, if you wanted to truly get into, you know, who can, you know, make the best case, maybe you just make them all one vote.
And that, you know, but again, it sort of takes away your leadership function, especially when you have a leader who has to deal with their committee chairman.
This is not as black box-orientated, jury-orientated as some are making it out to be.
Some just don't like their results because in the steering committee, it is about relationships.
It's about who's done what.
It's a meritocracy should be.
Sometimes it's not.
I'm going to admit that.
But it's also a way that if you're not playing with the team, so to speak, if you're a Republican and you're voting against every Republican idea and you're just causing a lot of issues, it is a way that you may not get the assignments you want.
Happens in every other place in life.
This has been a lot of discussion here recently into how this goes along.
And the makeup and move of the steering committee could affect how members get on different committees or not get on different committees.
It's just a thought out there that I wanted to lay for you as we go forward.
So these are the things that are behind the scenes.
If you're wanting me to go into depth on any more of these, please go to the dougcollinspodcast.com, hit me an email.
I'd be happy to do another episode going even further behind the scenes of what is happening here.
But I just wanted you to get clarification on what's being asked for, what's being wanted.
The transparency, the budget items, those are all good.
Many of those of which will not pass on the floor, but if they're actually stuck to, would maybe give some more fiscal responsibility.
So I think it's a balance of what's happening here.
The big concern with a lot of this, and for many members of Congress who, especially when it gets beyond the policy, beyond the makeup of things that go to the floor and how we vote on stuff and how those members vote on...
And it gets into who's on what committees and how they get there.
Instead of it being a meritocracy, it becomes, I will be, you're going to reward behavior that slows everything up.
That's when the 200 and something members of the Republican conference are sitting back saying, wait, why didn't I pitch a fit to get what I want?
This is just a problem.
If it sticks to policy, I'm in agreement with a lot of what they're asked for, think some of it should be done, and then actually followed up on the other parts are going to be a little bit harder to digest.
But that's your primer.
That's your Monday morning primer on what has went on in the past week, how it will affect you in the future.
We'll see, but we'll keep you up to date here on the Doug Collins Podcast.
Hey folks, MyPillow is excited to bring to you their biggest bedding sale ever.
For a limited time, you're gonna get the Giza Dream bed sheets for as low as $29.98, a set of pillowcases for only $9.98, and rejuvenate your bed with a MyPillow mattress topper for as low as $99.99.
$99.99, get a mattress pillow topper.
Look, they come in all sizes, they got all kinds of stuff, blankets, they've got duvets, they got quilts, they got comforts, they got body pillows, they got bolster pillows, they got all at big, big discounts.
And also, they're extending their money-back guarantee for Christmas until March 1, 2023, making them the perfect gift for your friends, your family, and for everyone you know.
Folks, and just from a personal note here, I have the Giza Dream Sheets.
They're on my bed right now.
I slept on them last night.
Some of the best sheets that we and Lisa and I have ever owned.
They are worth, I mean, at this price, they're a steal.
My wife and I have bought bed sheets, linens, at much higher cost.
It's supposedly much higher quality.
These from MyPillow are at the highest of quality, and at a price like this, you can't beat it.
So go now to MyPillow.com, use promo code Collins, C-O-L-L-I-N-S, or call 1-800-986-3994, and you'll get huge discounts on all the MyPillow bedding products, including the Giza Dream bed sheets for as low as $29.98, and get all your shopping done while quality is last.
▲
Export Selection