Hi Friend, Like you, we’re watching the mess in the House of Representatives, and like you, we’re fed up with Congress’ failure to launch. Kevin McCarthy seems convinced that the only path forward to securing the speaker’s gavel is to strike a deal with the roughly 20 far-right members withholding their support. But the deal he is pursuing would enable this small far-right faction to dominate what happens in the House for the next two years. For example, McCarthy reportedly is agreeing to a provision that would enable a single member of Congress to bring the House to a standstill by forcing an immediate floor vote on kicking out the speaker. It would mean McCarthy would have to govern focused not on doing what’s best for the country but on ensuring he doesn’t cross the furthest-right members of his caucus. There’s more. Under McCarthy’s deal, members of the far-right Freedom Caucus would be guaranteed important committee chairmanships and committee seats. That means Freedom Caucus members would be positioned to derail any legislation that doesn’t pass their strict purity tests. The holdouts have also demanded that McCarthy set up a spending battle over the looming debt ceiling limit that will occur later this year. A showdown would kick off the first debt limit crisis in 12 years and have potentially serious economic consequences. Ballot after ballot, Kevin McCarthy seems to be convinced that these concessions, and many more like them, are his best and only hope for becoming speaker and breaking the gridlock keeping Congress from doing its work. But is it worth making these controversial changes to get the House in order? We want to hear from you: Do you think the speaker concessions are good or bad for the country? | 
