Tweet
Committee of One
Washington Post
Thursday, November 1, 2007; A21
By Robert D. Novak, Op-Ed Columnist
A story told in cloakrooms of the House of Representatives shows how
ironic life on Capitol Hill can be. Jim McCrery, the low-key,
hardworking ranking Republican on the Ways and Means Committee, has
spent all year trying to establish good relations with the tax-writing
committee's first Democratic chairman in 12 years, Charles Rangel. He
succeeded, only to discover that Rangel does not really run Ways and
Means. Nancy Pelosi does.
Rangel, a crafty New York politician, so far looks like the weakest Ways
and Means chairman during my 50 years in Washington. That's only because
Pelosi so far is the most powerful speaker of the House during that same
period, a reality obscured by her historic role as the first woman to
hold that office. She does not confer with or defer to standing
committee chairmen, whose predecessors made previous speakers dance to
their tune.
On both sides of the aisle, the 67-year-old grandmother from San
Francisco is referred to as the "Committee of One" who rules the House.
Many speakers over the years relied on their majority leader, as
Republican Dennis Hastert let Tom DeLay handle day-to-day operations.
But not Pelosi, who actually opposed Steny Hoyer's election as majority
leader.
Ruling absolutely does not mean all Democrats think she rules well. Her
misguided effort to pass a resolution condemning the 1915 Armenian
genocide constitutes a rare public blunder, but beyond that she has not
crafted a coherent Democratic message. This month's Harris Poll puts her
nationwide job disapproval ("fair" or "poor") at 57 percent. But she is
an icon at the Democratic grass roots, and none of the committee
chairmen who have been downgraded by her -- certainly not Rangel --
utters a word of public criticism.
Rangel's massive tax reform proposal, released last week, gets less
respect than is normally accorded to a Ways and Means chairman's plan,
because Pelosi is not on board. Rangel's desire to compromise with the
Bush administration on international trade agreements has been
frustrated because the speaker defers to Rangel's trade subcommittee
chairman, Sander Levin, who follows organized labor's protectionist line.
Much the same treatment has been experienced by John Dingell, the senior
member of Congress, as Energy and Commerce Committee chairman. In bygone
days, Dingell deferred to neither Democratic presidents nor speakers.
But Pelosi is determined to pass an energy bill this year even though it
means crossing Dingell, who as a Detroiter opposes Californian Pelosi on
vehicle mileage and emission standards. A sage old professional, Dingell
knows there is no political profit in publicly clashing with Madam Speaker.
No committee chairman wants to take the risk of going public against
Pelosi, including one who sought her advice -- and, hopefully, support
-- on a controversial matter of House business. This anonymous chairman
was rebuffed by the speaker, who declined to talk to him, in person or
over the telephone.
Being the "Committee of One" does not mean Pelosi is without
lieutenants. She is close to two fellow Californians, both fiercely
partisan, who head committees: George Miller (Education and Labor) and
Henry Waxman (Oversight and Government Reform). Miller is regarded as
her consigliere, always at her side. She is also considered close to
moderate chairmen Ike Skelton (Armed Services) and John Spratt (Budget),
plus liberal chairman Barney Frank (Financial Services).
That does not mean, however, that she always takes their advice. Witness
her big blunder as speaker. Skelton, a seasoned student of international
relations, told her the Armenian resolution would antagonize Turkey and
thus constituted a foreign policy debacle in the making. Rahm Emanuel,
the House Democratic Caucus chairman, also opposed it (as he had when
serving as President Bill Clinton's political aide). Pelosi insisted
until some 45 House Democrats -- including Skelton -- opposed her.
The Armenian episode suggests a Pelosi decision has to approach the
brink of disaster before Democrats speak out. Her popularity in the
party beyond Capitol Hill is too great. When I asked one esteemed
Democratic operative whether Pelosi's authority is without restraint, he
called that a sexist question because I never would have asked that
about Sam Rayburn or Tip O'Neill. Indeed, I would not have. They were
not that powerful.
2007 Creators Syndicate Inc.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content /article/2007/10/31/AR2007103102559.html?referrer= emailarticle
Washington Post
Thursday, November 1, 2007; A21
By Robert D. Novak, Op-Ed Columnist
A story told in cloakrooms of the House of Representatives shows how
ironic life on Capitol Hill can be. Jim McCrery, the low-key,
hardworking ranking Republican on the Ways and Means Committee, has
spent all year trying to establish good relations with the tax-writing
committee's first Democratic chairman in 12 years, Charles Rangel. He
succeeded, only to discover that Rangel does not really run Ways and
Means. Nancy Pelosi does.
Rangel, a crafty New York politician, so far looks like the weakest Ways
and Means chairman during my 50 years in Washington. That's only because
Pelosi so far is the most powerful speaker of the House during that same
period, a reality obscured by her historic role as the first woman to
hold that office. She does not confer with or defer to standing
committee chairmen, whose predecessors made previous speakers dance to
their tune.
On both sides of the aisle, the 67-year-old grandmother from San
Francisco is referred to as the "Committee of One" who rules the House.
Many speakers over the years relied on their majority leader, as
Republican Dennis Hastert let Tom DeLay handle day-to-day operations.
But not Pelosi, who actually opposed Steny Hoyer's election as majority
leader.
Ruling absolutely does not mean all Democrats think she rules well. Her
misguided effort to pass a resolution condemning the 1915 Armenian
genocide constitutes a rare public blunder, but beyond that she has not
crafted a coherent Democratic message. This month's Harris Poll puts her
nationwide job disapproval ("fair" or "poor") at 57 percent. But she is
an icon at the Democratic grass roots, and none of the committee
chairmen who have been downgraded by her -- certainly not Rangel --
utters a word of public criticism.
Rangel's massive tax reform proposal, released last week, gets less
respect than is normally accorded to a Ways and Means chairman's plan,
because Pelosi is not on board. Rangel's desire to compromise with the
Bush administration on international trade agreements has been
frustrated because the speaker defers to Rangel's trade subcommittee
chairman, Sander Levin, who follows organized labor's protectionist line.
Much the same treatment has been experienced by John Dingell, the senior
member of Congress, as Energy and Commerce Committee chairman. In bygone
days, Dingell deferred to neither Democratic presidents nor speakers.
But Pelosi is determined to pass an energy bill this year even though it
means crossing Dingell, who as a Detroiter opposes Californian Pelosi on
vehicle mileage and emission standards. A sage old professional, Dingell
knows there is no political profit in publicly clashing with Madam Speaker.
No committee chairman wants to take the risk of going public against
Pelosi, including one who sought her advice -- and, hopefully, support
-- on a controversial matter of House business. This anonymous chairman
was rebuffed by the speaker, who declined to talk to him, in person or
over the telephone.
Being the "Committee of One" does not mean Pelosi is without
lieutenants. She is close to two fellow Californians, both fiercely
partisan, who head committees: George Miller (Education and Labor) and
Henry Waxman (Oversight and Government Reform). Miller is regarded as
her consigliere, always at her side. She is also considered close to
moderate chairmen Ike Skelton (Armed Services) and John Spratt (Budget),
plus liberal chairman Barney Frank (Financial Services).
That does not mean, however, that she always takes their advice. Witness
her big blunder as speaker. Skelton, a seasoned student of international
relations, told her the Armenian resolution would antagonize Turkey and
thus constituted a foreign policy debacle in the making. Rahm Emanuel,
the House Democratic Caucus chairman, also opposed it (as he had when
serving as President Bill Clinton's political aide). Pelosi insisted
until some 45 House Democrats -- including Skelton -- opposed her.
The Armenian episode suggests a Pelosi decision has to approach the
brink of disaster before Democrats speak out. Her popularity in the
party beyond Capitol Hill is too great. When I asked one esteemed
Democratic operative whether Pelosi's authority is without restraint, he
called that a sexist question because I never would have asked that
about Sam Rayburn or Tip O'Neill. Indeed, I would not have. They were
not that powerful.
2007 Creators Syndicate Inc.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content /article/2007/10/31/AR2007103102559.html?referrer= emailarticle