Just saying, I can see the potential of a good reason for some reform. There’s usually an opposing viewpoint that’s rational to someone eh… like maybe these guys have a rightful critique that the auditors in the ethics office are a bunch of nitpickers, and they want to smack them across the knuckles here, figuratively. But we are not given any of that reasoning such that the story is constructed to play to the trope of GOP and Trump corruption. It’s just like, “see, the GOP just wants to go full bribery in the age of Trump.’ Cmon, I doubt that’s the reasoning.
Story detail: “There was no advance notice or debate on the measure”.
This is misleading. We’re not talking about a public meeting of congress. It’s a caucus meeting, and what they decided was they’d put something on the public agenda for the full House, where there will be discussion for the public record.