Leadership in the House of Representatives

On February 2, the House will vote on leadership. Clearly, we could do better. On the democratic side, we have Nancy Pelosi - a shrill liberal from California. In her vision, anything to the right of San Francisco is reactionary. Clearly, she represents what is wrong with the democratic party nationally (with Harry Reid and Howard Dean the party is in no shape to provide any guidance on any idea nationally). But the real fights are in the GOP.

Again, clearly something is drastically wrong. The role of K street, not just with Abramoff (all though he is bad enough) is too pervasive. That is shown by the role of set asides in almost every piece of legislation that is passed. Transportation bill, agriculture, energy bill - all loaded with narrow junk. Then there is the ability of former members to get on the floor at any time. A lot of retired members go up to K street. Why should they be allowed to go back on the floor when the House is conducting business? Then there is the open-ended junket problem - all sorts of interests can pick up a member and his staff fly then anywhere in the world for who knows what. In many cases the costs of the travel are required to be reimbursed but that is not enough. David Drier, the Chair of the Rules Committee, is working on a set of rules changes and when I heard him speak he at least had the right direction on many issues.

The real issue comes down to who is in charge. J.C. Watts, the former Oklahoma congressman, had a quip that the GOP became arrogant in 10 years while it took the dems almost 40 to do it. The leadership problems in the Congress are not just in this generation. Who can ever forget the Sleazer of the House - Jim (the booksalesman) Wright? The fight this time, comes down in part for one of the lesser positions to three people - John Boehner (Ohio), Roy Blunt (Missouri), and John Shadegg (Arizona). Boehner has been an interested chair in an area that I know something about (education). But he is a walking sign post for many of the things that are wrong with the Congress. He has a daughter that works for a subsidiary of the largest provider of student loans and a whole bunch of ties that look like conflicts of interest. Roy Blunt is Mr. set aside and the current majority leader. Neither of these guys seems like a likely candidate for change. Then there is John Shadegg. Yesterday a group of influential leaders from the blogosphere endorsed his candidacy.

I am not sure who the best candidate is. Clearly it is not Blunt or Boehner. What I am impressed about is a developing movement among some members to understand that some fundamental changes have to be considered and adopted. Dan Lungren, who is from the Sacramento area, and new this term (but has a lot of prior House experience) seems to be seeking out some new thoughts. He was an early opponent of set asides. He also has raised flags about his neighboring member (John Doolittle - who has the twin talents of being both sanctimonious and has a long and inglorious history of skating on the bounds of propriety - from his role in redistricting, to ties to Abramoff, to many things which are less visible). I am impressed with Dan's positions here. Hopefully, his positions will represent the new majority. If they do not, and if the GOP leadership does not recognize the genuine distrust of their position that is widespread around the country, then we might be blessed with a Pelosi speakership at the end of the year.