The New York Times' continuing hostility toward the GOP's conservative Freedom Caucus got snide in Sunday's news pages: "The Fights That Ryan Will Face as Speaker, In Plain English" by Kevin Quealy and Carl Hulse.
Hulse, a veteran congressional reporter, never hides his Democratic sympathies. Quealy is part of the graphics team for the Times and presumably guided the mild special FX of the online version.
It's a snide, cynical "translation" of a Freedom Caucus-issued 21-item questionnaire, converting its standard congressional-ese into the apparently rude and aggressive demands that the "hard-right" caucus is prepared to make on Speaker of the House in waiting, Paul Ryan, including holding legislation "hostage." (A shorter version composed of just 6 questions appeared in Sunday's print edition.)
Representative Paul D. Ryan of Wisconsin appears to have rounded up sufficient support to become the next speaker of the House. But the tensions that plagued House Republicans under Speaker John A. Boehner are unlikely to disappear under Mr. Ryan.
One sign of those of tensions came Wednesday, when the Freedom Caucus, the hard-right group that helped topple Mr. Boehner, stopped short of giving Mr. Ryan its formal endorsement. Why? Many of the answers can be found in a list of 21 demands that the Freedom Caucus released in recent weeks, calling for changes to House rules and practices. Mr. Ryan and the caucus agreed to defer a broader discussion of the wishes until after the election of a speaker.
The Times introduced the dubious gag, whose only purpose is to make conservatives look unreasonable and holding lesiglation "hostage," like this: "....Full of jargon and procedural terms, the questionnaire is meant more for lawmakers and their aides than their constituents. But, properly translated, the document is a revealing one, offering insight into how the Freedom Caucus hopes to change the institution and the role of the speaker of the House. Here, we provide a translation."
(Bolds added by blogger.)
Question 1
Would you ensure conservatives have appropriate representation on the Steering Committee?
a) How would you do so?
Translates to
Do you promise to take away the power the speaker has in choosing committee chairmen and give more of that power to us?
The Steering Committee is a powerful tool of the speaker. It appoints the leaders of all House committees and the appropriations subcommittees, which regulate government spending. It may be nominally undemocratic for the speaker and his or her allies handpicked for the committee to select the leader, but it does enforce discipline within the party. The Freedom Caucus would like to significantly diminish this power and instead give the speaker a more institutional role. In their view, this would result in a House where power is more decentralized.
....
Question 4
Will you oppose proposals to amend conference rules to punish members for procedural votes?
Translates to
Can we continue to buck the leadership without retribution?
Republican members frustrated by some conservatives’ unwillingness to stay in line have suggested that rules be changed to punish them if, for instance, they refuse to vote for the party’s candidate for speaker on the House floor.
....
Question 11
Instead of the current committees-reported version of reconciliation, would you pass a full repeal of Obamacare via reconciliation by the end of 2015 to fulfill the promise made to conservatives through the FY 15 budget resolution?
Translates to
We’re serious about repealing Obamacare, not just parts of it. You’re committed to doing that, right?
Activists and hard-line conservatives believe that the current attempt to overturn the health care law through an arcane procedure known as reconciliation comes up short. They want the entire program killed. Authors of the reconciliation bill say their effort is subject to a very specific set of rules and that it is an aggressive attempt to do all they can to upend the health care law.
....
Question 13
Would you attach significant structural entitlement reforms included in the FY 2016 budget resolution, such as welfare reform, and significant process changes, such as legislation establishing an automatic continuing resolution and the Default Prevention Act, to legislation that would raise the debt limit and not schedule the consideration of another vehicle that contains a debt limit increase?
Translates to
Are you willing to hold the debt limit hostage until we prevail on other issues?
....
Question 15
Would you commit to passing all 12 appropriations bills and not acquiesce to a continuing resolution in the event Senate Democrats try to block the appropriations process?
a) Would you ensure that the House-passed appropriations bills do not contain funding for Planned Parenthood, unconstitutional amnesty, the Iran deal, and Obamacare?
Translates to
Do you promise to shut down the government in December if Democrats fail to give in to all of our demands?
Perhaps the main difference between the Freedom Caucus and other Republican members of the House is their unwillingness to compromise on a range of issues, including the Affordable Care Act, an immigration overhaul and Planned Parenthood funding. Here, they are asking the next speaker to commit to shutting down the government unless Democrats surrender on these issues. The federal government is funded through Dec. 11, which means these negotiations would take place soon after the new speaker is sworn in.
