House Republicans deemed it “Crypto Week.”
The GOP leadership teed up myriad bills focused on regulation, and non-regulation, of cryptocurrency.
It was more like cryptic week.
“I am tired of making history. I just want normal Congress,” declared House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La.
TRUMP’S MODEST SPENDING CUTS PACKAGE SURVIVES NARROW SENATE VOTE AS SOME REPUBLICANS BREAK RANKS
What Johnson referred to was the House holding open a procedural vote to begin debate on the three crypto bills. However, because of a revolt by House conservatives, the vote began at 1:19 p.m. last Wednesday and closed at 11:04 p.m. In so doing, the House established a new record for the longest vote in history: nine hours and 45 minutes. However, the House just previously established a new record for the longest vote earlier this month in the run-up to the debate on the “big, beautiful bill.” The old record for a vote was 7 hours and 31 minutes.
“They told me we set another record last night for the open vote or something. But it never concerns me how long a vote is open. We just have to have the right results,” mused Johnson.
MARK GREEN RESIGNS FROM CONGRESS, FURTHER SHRINKING HOUSE GOP MAJORITY
The week in Congress was messier than a Coldplay concert.
Republicans intended to advance the crypto bills, but the House majority stumbled last Tuesday when conservatives balked at bringing the measures to the floor over a host of issues. Their resistance blew up a test vote, preventing the House from debating the bills. The rebellion caught the GOP brass by surprise, and Fox is told it infuriated President Donald Trump, as he wanted to sign one of the crypto bills into law by the end of last week.
Some of the insurgents hustled down to the White House Tuesday night for President Trump to sort out the problem – with Johnson joining on the phone.
So the House took a mulligan and tried again last Wednesday. However, the president and GOP leadership failed to immediately resolve the issue – prompting the record-breaking roll call vote on Wednesday.
Majorities of both parties periodically struggle to bring important bills to the floor – sometimes having recalcitrant members tank their own legislative initiatives. That’s why leaders meet with members and get the president involved.
But all was not settled.
Yours truly cannot recount a single instance when House leaders of either party faced an internal revolt – then tried again the next day – only to fail again. This is augmented by the intervention of the president.
However, the House was finally able to advance the crypto bills last Thursday afternoon. That cleared the way for the House to move to a bill to rescind funding which Congress had already approved for foreign aid and the Corporation for Public Broadcasting.
But it was a race against the clock.
Both bodies of Congress had until 11:59:59 p.m. ET Friday night to okay the claw back. Otherwise, the package was dead. It would face a Senate filibuster if Republicans tried again. Wrapping things up to cancel the spending was a sprint. The Senate finally approved the bill just before 2:30 a.m. ET last Thursday. The House managed to align with the Senate – after consternation about the cryptocurrency bills – at 12:05 a.m. ET Friday, but there was a debate about whether the House could actually sync up in time.
The Senate pace – coupled with the House’s crypto crisis – didn’t help matters.
House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., was coming off a stemwinder of a speech against the “big, beautiful bill” earlier this month. On the morning of July 3, Jeffries spoke for eight hours and 45 minutes – the longest speech in House history (remember what Johnson said about the House making history?). With the House still partially stymied by the cryptocurrency stasis, could Jeffries stretch things out past the Friday deadline?
First of all, such a scenario would require tremendous stamina from Jeffries. Yes, Sen. Cory Booker, D-N.J., established a new record for the longest speech in Senate history earlier this year. Booker spoke for 25 hours and five minutes from March 31 to April 1. However, Senate rules allow a senator who has the floor to “yield for a question” to another senator. It’s kind of like a timeout in basketball. Booker scored multiple “timeouts” as fellow Democrats would step in for Booker, giving lengthy speeches themselves. All they had to do was punctuate their remarks with an interrogative at the end. That helped Booker maintain the floor – physically and parliamentarily.
There’s no such “timeout” in the House.
Most speeches in the House run for a minute. However, it’s customary to show deference to the top leaders in both parties. Thus, the speaker of the House, House minority leader and sometimes a few others score what’s called a “magic minute.” The presiding officer simply doesn’t gavel down those leaders after a minute. They can speak as long as they want, but they have to do the speaking. They can’t just yield to Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, D-N.Y., or Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn. It’s all on the member who has the floor.
“Do you expect any delay tactics tonight to try to stall this?” asked yours truly of Jeffries a few hours before the spending cancellation legislation came to the floor. “You set a record with a speech just a couple of weeks ago.”
“We’re just looking forward to an active and robust debate on the House floor so we can lay out for the American people why Republicans continue to take steps to hurt them as opposed to helping them,” replied Jeffries.
“So not anticipating a ‘magic minute’ like you did a couple of weeks ago?” I followed up.
“I do expect to participate in the debate,” responded Jeffries. “And I expect that I will speak longer than a minute.”
That drew laughter from the Congressional press corps.
However, Lisa Desjardins of the PBS NewsHour wasn’t done with Jeffries.
“Just to be clear, are you considering a possible speech that would be long enough (to stretch past the deadline)?” questioned Desjardins.
“I’m surprised how much attention the ‘magic minute’ is generating at this particular point in time,” remarked Jeffries.
“Well, the fate of all this money could come to that,” observed Desjardins.
At the press conference, Jeffries said he intended to meet with Democratic New York Mayoral nominee Zorhan Mamdani that Friday. To date, Jeffries has still not endorsed Mamdani – and has caught flak from liberals for not doing so. Jeffries and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., find themselves in a pickle – trying to finesse what to do about Mamdani. Many Democrats believe Mamdani is too liberal for the party and could cost Democrats House seats in the 2026 midterms – especially in battleground districts around New York City.
A coterie of reporters followed Jeffries down the hall after the press conference.
“What kinds of things are you considering on whether to endorse?” asked Caitlin Huey-Burns of CBS.
“I’m looking forward to the conversation tomorrow, and we’ll explore all of the issues that I just discussed with our Democratic nominee, and then we’ll take it from there,” said Jeffries.
Your trusty reporter asked Jeffries about “what would be the signal” for him to endorse Mamdani or someone else.
“As has been the case with every single high-profile endorsement decision that I’ve made in the past, I have a sit-down conversation, and then I take it from there,” answered Jeffries.
One wondered if the confluence of the spending cut bill and Jeffries political quandary might present him with a unique opportunity.
“Would you use your magic minute to keep from having the meeting tomorrow?” I asked.
Jeffries walked away with no response, but those assembled in the Capitol hallway chortled at the question.
Later that night, Jeffries spoke for 15 minutes against the spending cancellation bill. He met with Mamdani on Friday. And by Monday, he still hadn’t weighed-in on the New York mayor’s race.
Cryptic indeed.
Read the full article here
