The House is not required to vote on anything to do with impeachment until it is presented with Articles of Impeachment, which logically have to be drafted after an investigation into what to include in them. There is no requirement that the House vote to set "parameters" on the impeachment inquiry itself. The linked article from Gateway Pundit complains that it is "[e]ven worse, House Democrats haven’t even named a specific crime committed by President Trump," ignoring the fact that this sort of information cannot be known until after an investigation is completed.
McCarthy complained that Pelosi has "given no clear indication as to how your impeachment inquiry will proceed — including whether key historical precedents or basic standards of due process will be observed," but she doesn't have to. I don't know what he means by "key historical precedents," but due process applies only to formal proceedings, not to investigations.
The trump administration has itself become known for its failure to observe "key historical precedents," (and laws) like obeying subpoenas and producing tax returns, for instance. There was a "historical precedent" of having White House press briefings, but that went out the window, too. And I seem to recall that the various executive-branch departments have not been following the requirements of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), passed in 1946, which governs the way in which federal agencies may propose and establish regulations and grants U.S. federal courts oversight over all agency actions:
Political lawsuits bring the Administrative Procedure Act to the forefront
Too much suspicion has been raised involving too many people, too many situations, and involving other countries to limit the scope of the inquiry before it can even get started, given that these suspicious matters involve the fundamental institutions of our country and it is imperative that the American People know the truth.
