Once House or Senate committee members are chosen, it will be up to the majority committee members ( NOT the party Leader) to elect a chairperson from their party group.īy the way, there would still be a House (and Senate) party Leader. To award longer term members for their extended service, any representatives with more than two terms could have their names entered twice in the lottery for each committees they were interested in. To keep everyone from submitting his or her name to every committee, each representative would be limited to volunteering for a set number of committees (perhaps six). Any Democrat representatives who are interested would submit their names – and the nine members would be determined by a lottery ( NOT the whims of the House Democrat Leader). Let’s say that there are nine Democrat committee positions on a certain House committee. For example, the majority party would still have the majority of members on committees. The details of how committees would be assigned could be worked out to be fair and non-political. Isn’t that more like the way the legislature should work in a truly democratic republic? Democrat Representative Jones could support Republican bill 54321 without fear of major political reprisals from his party leadership. Instead, legislators would be much more inclined to vote for what was best for their constituents and the country. Once those unwarranted powers were removed, these party leaders would have a much smaller cudgel to browbeat their party members into lockstep submission. Here are two simple examples that would have a profoundly beneficial impact:ġ) remove their power to appoint legislators to committees, andĢ) remove their power to appoint chairpersons to committees. The easy solution to fix this undemocratic and unreasonable situation is to remove some of the power these nationally unelected political party leaders have. As such, why does this nationally un-elected person have the power to control the destiny of our entire country? The concern here is that not a single citizen voted for anyone to be the House Democrat Leader (or Republican Leader, as all of this applies to both parties, and in the Senate). In a nutshell, this is why there is gridlock – because legislators often vote in lockstep as a political party block, rather than what is in the best interest of their constituents and country! Unfortunately, the current system we have assures that “b” will almost always be the choice made. So his choice is: a) do what is in the best interest of his constituents and the country regarding 54321 or b) do what is in his own best political interests (and that of Ms. Any bills he introduces could go nowhere. He could be bumped from a committee membership that he values. What potential penalties could Rep Jones suffer if he goes against the wishes of the Speaker? He could be stripped of any committee leadership positions he has, or lose his seniority on a committee. Jones will be in a tough reelection fight next year, she may cut him some slack and let him “vote his conscience” – and her long-term political best interests.) (If Speaker Pelosi has enough votes anyway and Mr. If he chooses to vote for 54321, the House Democrat Leader could ensure that he suffers severe political penalties. The fly in the ointment here is that in this case the House Democrat Leader has decided that Democrats should oppose 54321. Let’s also say that Democrat Representative Jones decides that supporting 54321 would be in the best interest of his constituents and the country as a whole. Let’s say that Republicans introduce a bill (H.R. To properly grasp this situation, it’s important to understand that essentially all legislation originates from specialized legislative committees. We need to look at a simplified legislative example to understand the problem and the solution. And yet there she is, able to close down numerous government services, with just the power of her intransigence.
Which citizens voted to give Nancy Pelosi the power to shut down our government? None.
0 kommentar(er)
