The
Untold Story
House
Republicans warrant much of the criticism they
get, but give them credit for this: They share
power more fairly with minority Democrats than the
Dems ever did with them.
Two
wrongs do not make a right but they at least
deserve to be reported. That revised axiom is
particularly true when holding politicians
accountable for abuses of power. Recent news
articles deservedly scathed the Republican House
majority in Virginia for failing to record
sub-committee votes, but media reports and
editorials implied that the Democrats, when they
held the majority, were more benevolent and
transparent with political power.
Let
me be perfectly clear: Any political body in the
United States that fails to record a public vote
is wrong, period. While it is true that the
sub-committee hearings and votes are open to the
public and usually well attended, it should not be
Joe Citizen’s job to count the raised hands or
voice votes.
But
how were things done during the preceding 130
years that the Democrats held the majority in the
Virginia General Assembly?
Currently,
the House Republican majority appoints committee
members in proportion to each party’s numbers.
In other words, if the Democrats have 45 percent
of the general membership in the House, they
receive that proportionate share of committee
slots. This proportionate power sharing
arrangement, adopted by the Republican majority
for no other apparent reason than to be fair,
never existed under the Democrat rule of over a
century.
Applying
this self-imposed rule after the Democrats
recently gained seats in the 2008 elections
required House Republicans to remove some of their
own party members from committees and replace them
with Democrats. Such a voluntarily relinquishing
of power is unprecedented in Virginia politics.
In
the 1990s, Democrats dominated the powerful House
Appropriations Committee, permitting Republicans
only a few token representatives. In 1992, the
Republicans had 18 members in the Senate, the
Democrats 22, yet the Senate Finance Committee was
made up of 12 Democrats and 3 Republicans.
Examples
of “hogging” power and killing bills in the
dark are easy to find under prior Democrat rule.
The media should at least compare the two
dynasties in a balanced manner.
To
take another example, the Republican minority had
no say (as in zero) in the selection of
Virginia’s judges for 130 years. Yet, after
Republicans took the majority they re-appointed
over 90 percent of the Democrat incumbent judges
and appointed or elevated other Democrats to the
bench, much to the dismay of many Republican
lawyers wanting to fill those positions. The
anticipated “bloodbath” in the judiciary never
occurred -- as was proper as a matter of principle
and continuity. Selecting judges is serious
business. But the Republicans' self restraint has
been little discussed or appreciated by the media.
Most
recently the media complained that the House
majority would not allow a Democratic delegate to
remove his own bill from a House floor vote.
Apparently, House Republicans wanted to force
Democrats to vote a pro-union bill up or down in
order to show union members that, given a chance,
some Democrats would vote for big business
contrary to campaign promises.
This
much-denounced parliamentary tactic was similar to
one employed by former majority whip and
accomplished Democrat quarterback Dickie Cranwell,
when he introduced the new governor’s budget as
his own and forced Republicans to publicly vote
upon George Allen’s proposed cost cuts. The
proposed budget reduced many facets of state
government and the public was up in arms with the
help of a little bit of demagoguery. Allen’s
cuts did not touch education but that was not what
was not the message to voters.
The
tactic boomeranged when a novice Republican nearly
beat Cranwell the next election. She simply showed
voters the budget bill that Cranwell had
introduced along with copies of news articles
quoting Democrat leaders, including the majority
whip, that the budget proposal would close
essential services. Politicians can often times
outfox themselves, a lesson that the Republican
majority would be wise to recall.
The
bottom line is that both parties use political
procedures and obscure parliamentary rules to get
their way. Neither party is pure nor do their
histories indicate that they ever will be so. They
are made up of humans after all, and they warrant
constant oversight with balanced and full
reporting.
On
balance, the Republican House majority has been
abundantly fair with committee appointments but
continues to make the same mistake as their
Democratic predecessors by refusing to record
sub-committee votes. If the media will accurately
report the fallacies and abuses of both parties,
present and past, the public will be much better
informed. Independents, after weighing both honest
assessments, might then be more persuaded to vote
accordingly come election time. They do, after
all, control the outcome of most elections.
--
February 25, 2008
|