Roll Call (subscription) reports that Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA) will be taking over the gavel of the House Energy & Commerce Committee from longtime Chairman John Dingell (D-MI), after a vote of 137-122 in the full House Democratic Caucus.
Yesterday's 25-22 vote in the House Democratic Steering and Policy Committee backing Henry Waxman's challenge for the gavel against sitting Chairman John Dingell wasn't the end of the contest. The outcome in the full Caucus was still uncertain until the votes were cast, and it was a close one.
The fight took on a bit more of an ideological tinge than leadership contests usually do. That could be because committee chairmanships are much more focused decisions, being limited to the legislative jurisdiction of the committee in question, or it could be a function of the rarity of this kind of challenge. Open bids to unseat sitting chairmen aren't all that common, and successes even less so. The seniority system, for all its faults, still looms large for many Members
Ideology, too, is an uncertain predictor, especially when weighed against factors such as past campaign support, personal relationships, regional affinities, etc. And we should keep in mind that the Steering Committee's vote isn't the last word:
"If you look at the makeup of that committee in terms of geography and political leanings, this is not the same dynamic as our whole caucus," said Jim Matheson of Utah, a Dingell backer.
And, we are quite properly reminded by CQ Politics:
In addition, five committee chairmen who usually serve on the steering committee could not vote because the caucus has not yet ratified them. They might have tipped the balance to Dingell.
Very true. Missing from the rolls of the Steering Committee were the Chairs of the Ways & Means, Financial Services, Appropriations and, of course, Energy & Commerce Committees, who sit on Steering by virtue of their positions. Not sure who the fifth missing chair was. But sitting committee chairmen tend, all things considered, to have a vested interest in protecting the primacy of the seniority system. It's possible that with just a three vote margin in yesterday's vote, having a full slate at the Steering Committee (minus the E&C slot, I guess) could have changed the outcome, and possibly colored this vote very differently. The Steering Committee's decision surely fed a feeling of momentum for Waxman that might not have been there otherwise.
But while seniority's important...
Lawmakers on both sides grappled with the question of seniority. "I can’t remember, since I’ve been here, that a sitting chairman has been removed," said Gene Green of Texas, a Dingell backer.
it's not the end of the issue for many rank-and-file members. Nor is it necessarily the case for sitting chairmen, who may see no contradiction between weighting seniority heavily, but also considering other factors:
But John M. Spratt Jr. of South Carolina said the threat to the seniority system has been exaggerated. "Seniority should count, but it’s not the final word," he said. Even if Dingell loses, "the system will carry on."
Besides, given Waxman's decades of service on Energy & Commerce -- indeed, his decades spent as the second-ranking Democrat, who just happens to be seated behind someone just days away from becoming the longest-serving Representative in history -- it's hard to consider Waxman's ascent as a fatal blow to the seniority system.
UPDATE: Looking back at Blue Dog Jim Matheson's assessment of the predictive value of the Steering Committee decision, I think he gets the buzzer on this one. The Steering Committee went 25-22, or 53.2%, for Waxman. The full Caucus went 137-122, or 52.9%, for Waxman.