John Boehner (R-Ohio) said he might lose his job as House speaker over immigration reform, but he insisted he will not bring a bill to the House floor that does not have majority support of both Republicans and Democrats. Following the Republican conference meeting on Tuesday, Boehner was asked: “Rep. Rohrabacher said that if you bring immigration reform to the floor without the support of the GOP conference you will lose your job (as speaker). Do you think that’s accurate?” “Maybe,” Boehner said after a long pause, to laughter from reporters.
Quote: Eglman wrote in post #2Why does johnny included Dems in his statement?
He said for the law to pass the dems have to start taking the republicans, if it comes to the floor, seriously.
“We’re going to lay all of this out and listen to what the members have to say,” he said. “I also suggested to our members today that any immigration reform bill that is going to go into law ought to have a majority of both parties’ support, if we’re really serious about making that happen.
“And so I don’t see any way of bringing an immigration bill to the floor that doesn’t have the majority support of Republicans,” Boehner said. “I just think the White House and Senate Democrats ought to get very serious.
Quote: Eglman wrote in post #2Why does johnny included Dems in his statement?
Cause they are the ones he is worried about pleasing on this. Not the American people or even his political base. He really doesn't want to miss out on Sally Quinns next party.
Rex Reed raves: " Frank Cannon is fascinating, informative, engaging and heartbreaking stuff." — New York Observer
Boehner’s remarks today carefully threaded a needle, reflecting the fact that many conservatives will be unhappy about an immigration deal passed mostly with Democratic votes.
“I also suggested to our members today that any immigration reform bill that is going to go into law ought to have a majority of both parties’ support if we’re really serious about making that happen,” Boehner said at a press conference. “And so I don’t see any way of bringing an immigration bill to the floor that doesn’t have a majority support of Republicans.”
But when a reporter asked him if he would require the rule to be applied to a House-Senate compromise bill, he said only, “We’ll see when we get there.”
1. “And so I don’t see any way of bringing an immigration bill to the floor that doesn’t have a majority support of Republicans.”
2. But when a reporter asked him if he would require the rule to be applied to a House-Senate compromise bill, he said only, “We’ll see when we get there.”
Assuming the vote numbers hold where we currently believe them to be, 1 precludes 2.
Quote: Cedric wrote in post #61. “And so I don’t see any way of bringing an immigration bill to the floor that doesn’t have a majority support of Republicans.”
2. But when a reporter asked him if he would require the rule to be applied to a House-Senate compromise bill, he said only, “We’ll see when we get there.”
Assuming the vote numbers hold where we currently believe them to be, 1 precludes 2.
Not if reconciliation guts the stuff in the bill that got the House to pass it.
Rex Reed raves: " Frank Cannon is fascinating, informative, engaging and heartbreaking stuff." — New York Observer
Quote: Cedric wrote in post #61. “And so I don’t see any way of bringing an immigration bill to the floor that doesn’t have a majority support of Republicans.”
2. But when a reporter asked him if he would require the rule to be applied to a House-Senate compromise bill, he said only, “We’ll see when we get there.”
Assuming the vote numbers hold where we currently believe them to be, 1 precludes 2.
Not if reconciliation guts the stuff in the bill that got the House to pass it.
There's nothin' to reconcile if the House bill never come to a vote.