Opinion: House holdouts overcame both mob rule and Pelosi’s top-down approach


To the editor – A friend of opposite political beliefs commented that these twenty representatives holding out voting for Speaker of the House are doing it for the money.

My belief is not so cynical. The debate for Speaker of the House gets right to the heart of our Republic. We are seeing a small group of the whole insist their will into the Whole. This is instead of a majority just choosing what to do and doing it as the whole. Very similar to the States fighting for power within the Federal Constitution during the debates and its writing. The small states insisted on representation by population and by state. Hence the House representing population and the Senate equal power to each state.

This is also why we the United States of America are not a Democracy but a Republic. The majority cannot flog it’s will onto the people as a whole. We are individuals and we all add to our entirety as a Nation.

From one person, to two, to a family, to a neighborhood, to a town, a city, a state and finally Our federal government. We are witnessing the genius of Our Founding Fathers and Our Founding Documents. The emotional slogan one vote per person being a pure Democracy always falls to tyranny of the majority.

This is why we have a Republic. The mob does not rule. Even the individual has a say. The twenty members that held strong in voting for the Speaker of the House were able to get concessions that their minority constituents wanted. Yes this is a great day for our Country. – Gerry Mittica, Springfield

To the editor – The Republicans’ speaker balloting was a response to former Speaker Pelosi’s top-down legislative control where bills bypassed the committee process and Republicans were rarely allowed input. The Republicans wanted to return to Regular Order as set up in the original House rules.

McCarthy’s dissenters were upset about spiraling inflation, deficit spending, and the left’s insanity. They proposed moving power from the speaker’s office back to committees and members where it belongs. They wanted the appropriations committee to set budget parameters and timeline to pass 12 separate appropriation bills that fund government, set policy, expand oversight and develop a debt-ceiling strategy. Also, they proposed a supermajority for tax increases and spending offsets for new programs from the current budget.

The recent passage of the $1.7T Omnibus bill was an example frequently referenced by the dissenters. The bill was 4000 pages of inflationary spending, jammed through by Pelosi in the middle of the night. The bill had 7000 earmarks, no committee review, amendments, debate or opportunity to be read. It was written behind closed doors and designed to fill the pockets of Democrats and their causes.

Congress’s approval rating has been dismal. Republican dissenters want to restore confidence and openness by stopping Pelosi’s complete control process. These reforms will allow debate, and transparency in the House. Voters have had enough of out-of-control government. Speaker McCarthy’s success will be measured by restoring credibility and more responsive legislative policies aided by these reforms. – Frank Mazur, South Burlington

Categories: Opinion

5 replies »

  1. Yes. This is the truth. In a time in Vermont when conservatives have largely stopped bothering to vote in socialist biased state, it is beautiful hearing truth.

  2. When they started to demonize the 20 Patriots as terrorists just because they wouldn’t go along to get along and stood up for our Constitution, I knew they were doing what’s right. So, what do we call the 18 Senate Republicans that passed the 1.7 trillion Omnibus stabbing the House in the back?

  3. It is difficult to realize that there are 80,000 (+/-) conservative leaning Vermonter’s. There are literally thousands of local positions (selectman, school board, lister, planning commission, library, etc.) that conservatives can easily fill and make a strong and positive impact on Vermont’s future.

Leave a Reply