House Democratic Majority Is Already Shooting Itself in the Foot
(Bloomberg Opinion) -- House Democrats are off to a surprisingly bad start.
They've already spent a lot of time and energy stabilizing their leadership. That really shouldn't have been a problem: They have, in Nancy Pelosi, a perfectly good option for speaker of the House. Instead, they've complicated things by expanding their bloated leadership team. Passing out titles does little to satisfy the real and legitimate concerns about centralization of power within the House, or the concerns about an aging and stagnant group of party leaders.
Worse is that Pelosi, who's still trying to nail down the votes she needs for the speaker floor vote, may be leaning toward supporting committee-chair term limits. That would be a serious mistake by her and the members who are agitating for the change.
Very simply: Committee-chair term limits are a disaster. They negate the slow build-up of expertise among members (and even staff) that allows committees to grow truly powerful. The 1995-2006 and 2011-2018 Republican-controlled Houses used the device. The result was that policy making by the committees atrophied, and was given over to the party leadership, or lobbyists, or sometimes no one at all. Or as Josh Huder puts it, committee term limits go against everything that congressional reformers have been advocating:
Instead, junior members, including the newly elected group, should be demanding stronger subcommittees, of the kind that existed in the 1970s through 1994. They allow the classic House trade-off: significant influence over a small number of things in exchange for going along on everything else. That's a big deal because the alternative for lawmakers is to be nothing more than a vote for the party program while they wait for a chance to actually have influence. As Congress scholar Burdett Loomis recalls: That's “definitely one lesson from Class of 1974 Democrats. They exercised substantial power in first term, and lots more in 2nd and 3rd terms through subcommittees.”
Power in the House isn't a zero-sum game. Building House capacity -- the ability to make policy -- makes the entire chamber more capable of solving problems, and better able to work for individual members and their constituents: It makes the House more powerful.
That's exactly what the new majority should want. It would be good for individual members, good for the Democratic Party, and good for the nation. It would be disappointing if the Democrats in control decide to emulate the failed governing style of Republicans under Speakers Newt Gingrich and Paul Ryan.
To contact the editor responsible for this story: Max Berley at mberley@bloomberg.net
This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial board or Bloomberg LP and its owners.
Jonathan Bernstein is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist covering politics and policy. He taught political science at the University of Texas at San Antonio and DePauw University and wrote A Plain Blog About Politics.
©2018 Bloomberg L.P.
-
High US Salaries, No Green Card Certainty: The Financial Calculation Facing Indian H-1B Families
The suspension of PERM processing at eight technology employers does not cancel existing H-1B visas. What it does is force a question many Indian families have been avoiding: is the US salary worth tying your career and family plans to one employer?
-
Swiggy vs Eternal: Food Delivery's Two Rivals Are No Longer In The Same Race
Eternal is building a private AI assistant, dark.ai. Swiggy is still working out how to make Instamart pay, with an operating loss of Rs 895 crore in the July-September quarter while Blinkit stayed profitable.
-
Where You Live Shapes How You Get To Work | The Reason Why
Two-wheelers are the most popular way to get to work in India, accounting for nearly 43% of workplace commutes.
-
Unhedged Position: Can India See An Indonesia-Style Time Correction?
The Nifty is trading below levels it first clocked in 2024. Is there, then, as I have suggested in the headline, potential that the current time correction drags on painfully for the next three-five, even ten years?
-
Navigating Friction And Energy Realities: An Analysis Of Marco Rubio's October Visit To India
Occurring at a critical juncture marked by stalled trade negotiations and escalating geopolitical pressures over global energy supplies, the visit offers a profound window into modern US-India relations.
-
India Exports Capital. Why Not Export Trusteeship?
The big question, then, is whether India can build an institution that global borrowers, investors, banks, and lawyers can trust, even without an Indian connection.
-
France's Economy & Politics Are In Crisis | The Reason Why
Let's look at how the French economy and politics evolved under Nicolas Sarkozy, Franois Hollande and Emmanuel Macron.
-
You May Inherit The Business. You Must Earn Its Credibility.
Succession tests the founder's ability to share authority as much as it tests the next generation's readiness to assume it.
-
Signing Deals Is One Thing; Making Them Work Is Another | The Week In Whys
Sometimes, things don't turn out as planned. Indian companies have lost some bids to rivals, some projects won't produce until 2030.
-
FOMC Wall, PERM Suspension, Hospital Stocks | Talking Points This Week
A PERM suspension would directly affect green-card sponsorship rather than H-1B visas, so the near-term earnings impact could remain relatively limited. The key question is whether this marks a new phase in US scrutiny of Indian IT.