Associated Press
Rep. Tim Huelskamp (R-Kan.) was one of the members punished for bucking GOP leaders.
On Capitol Hill yesterday, the biggest story seemed to be the House Republican leadership's deeply silly debt-reduction offer, but there was another story that was arguably more important a little further from the spotlight.
Perhaps presaging a year in which revolts by rank-and-file members will be less tolerated, Republican leaders on Monday removed members with obstinate voting patterns from key committees.
Most notably, Representative Tim Huelskamp, Republican of Kansas, one of the most conservative members of the House, was removed from the budget committee as well as the agriculture committee. Joining Mr. Huelskamp, a second-term representative, on the budget committee bye-bye list was Representative Justin Amash of Michigan.
Both members have a history of voting against party leaders on bills, both in committee and on the floor, and it seemed Speaker John A. Boehner and the committee chairmen had had enough. Mr. Huelskamp and Mr. Amash both rejected the so-called Ryan budget, proposed by Representative Paul D. Ryan of Wisconsin, because its cuts were not deep enough.
At the same time, Reps. David Schweikert (R-Ariz.) and Walter Jones (R-N.C.) lost their spots on the House Financial Services Committee.
There's no great mystery as to how and why this occurred -- the GOP leadership did not see these four lawmakers as "team players," and their perceived disloyalty came with a price. This also presumably sends a related message to the rest of the often-rancorous caucus that the party is keeping score and expects discipline.
There are multiple angles to a story like this. Is House Speaker John Boehner trying to lock up more power? How much were the committee chairs involved? Were some of the Republicans punished yesterday penalized for having endorsed Ron Paul's presidential campaign? And why does the leadership see the House Science Committee as the dumping ground for members they're upset with?
But the larger dynamic to keep an eye on is what this means for the Tea Partiers, especially those elected in 2010.
Remember, when House Republicans took control last year, they did so with an enormous freshman class that had no particular loyalty to Boehner. It was quite common in this Congress for the Speaker to take orders from his caucus, instead of the other way around, thanks the GOP's rebellious members.
For many Tea Partiers, this was something to be proud of -- they're "outsiders," the argument goes, who have no use for the entrenched establishment.
Yesterday's committee-assignment shakeups let these Tea Partiers know that recalcitrance comes with a price. Indeed, it's notable that three of the four lawmakers affected by yesterday's decision were freshmen elected in the 2010 wave.
The question, then, is what the far-right members intend to do about the renewed effort to establish party discipline. I suspect the answer is they'll fall in line, fearing additional sanctions, but it's worth watching.
Leave a Comment:
Why not Michelle Bachmann? The entire Republican Study Committee? Steven King? Peter King? The point is that this is completely feckless, kicking anti-government people out of government posts is absurd...
Don't forget the ideolgoical Paul Braun on the Science committee...
These people are there because they are team players, Republican team players put on those committees to counter any committee purposes that may seem progressive or at odds with the GOP platform of profits and power.
It must be a slow news day to spend time on this story. Shake ups occur on both sides with any new Congress
Not at all the reason is different. You see people like Steve King, or Bachmann, Gohmert or some of the other Joe Walsh-like wackos have a large following. If Boehner removed them these folks would whine and cry while claiming persecution. This would make the bat-crap crazy followers to attack Boehner and say he is no conservative...blah blah...blah socialize...blah blah.. This would only make his job harder. In short he is sending a message that if you want to get in his way on important things he and the house want or need to get done then you're not going to be in any place of leadership. Boehner's basically saying he's the captain of the ship and if you want to mutiny you're going over board because he's sick of it. Johnny B Speaker is picking on these guys because he knows they can't fight back, that they are the lackeys so that means expendable
So the House Science Committee will be graced with the presence of yet more yahoos incapable of passing a freshman level science course.
Oh joy.
Oh rapture.
Can we build Moon Base Newt for these guys? Imagine, they will only be able to communicate via a radio link we can turn off...
The Republicans don't give a rat's patootie about science, so they can let the morons talk about Jesus and the dinosaurs and how trees create oil and all the other fundamentalist moron baloney to their heat's content.
If they have "no use" for the Washington Establishment (which includes the committee structure) then they should have "no problem" with losing those committee assignments.
It will free them up to focus on constituent services.
Thanks, Mike, I needed the laugh.
Sounds like the Syrian republicans are going to start using chemical weapons...
Although I dislike Boehner, I do have to applaud him for this move.
He's allowed a VERY SMALL minority to run the show at best, and totally muck things up at worse.
The tea party deserves the minuscule voice they have. Boehner has allowed them way too much power.
Walter Jones, of course, was whacked for being the only sane member of the caucus left. The first to turn against Little Georgie's invasion of Poland, er, I mean Iraq, the first to call out Wall Street - that's the real reason he was removed from Financial Services; the shiny little pimps of Goldman-Sachs gave Bonehead his marching order on that one.
Republicans are paying the price for getting in bed with the Tea Party and the divorce is going to be really messy. But if the Republicans want to survive as a national party, this war will be necessary. If the Tea Party wants to have influence, then they will have to give up their control over the Republican party. The Tea Party cannot survive as an independent political party and there is nowhere for them to go. Splitting from the Republican party will leave the Tea Party as a minor power in some states while being neutered in the national politic.
The interesting thing is that hyperpartisanship combined with the two party system perverts democracies into dictatorships. Take Huelskamp (KS-1) for example. This is a deep deep red district, and yet in 2010, the Koch Brothers got involved in the district to become Huelskamp's backer. In 2012, Huelskamp got 100% of the vote. Even the self described "last dictator of Europe",
Lukashenko gets 80% of the vote in Belarus.
I live in a deep blue state, and the fact of the matter is that once a Dem wins a national seat, it is virtually their seat for life. What about democracy and suffrage? 10% of the voters of KS-01 are hispanic. 38% of Kansas voted for Obama. Do they have representation? No. Do they have a reasonable expectation their congressperson has any respect for their letters? No. It is a dictatorship- They effectively are disenfranchised- Their vote for congressperson will never matter until DEMs self deport from Kansas.
Lukashenko has prepared for succession, and military officers have been ordered to salute his seven year old son. Fortunately the US has no such family based system of succession. Right? Right? We comfort ourselves with the thought that it is simply due to the merit of the Bushs, Kennedys, Clintons, Cuomos and Pauls that power is passed from one to the next in the family chain.
Is this where we are going with deep red or blue supermajority states- deep red or blue congressional districts? Is the next step that Huelskamp begins grooming his son to continue with the family gravy train from Koch Industries? The problem with these virtual dictatorships is their corruptibility by monied interests.
And that is why we have them. That is why hyperpartisan warfare is deliberately sought by the plutocrats. So which direction is the way out of this trap? To blow down the obstructionism we need Dem majorities, but do we really believe Nirvana is California style monopoly on power by a single party?
No. The end game is that we must put in place national proportional "choice voting" as advocated by FairVote.org. This is the only way I see those 38% of Kansas democrats getting the right to a representative in Congress. This is the trap of the parties that the founders abhorred. This is the way out of the red state blue state paralysis that grips the country.
This is the way to dodge the Lukashenko bullet the Kochs are firing at the heart of our democracy.
I have issues with the 435 cap on the House of Representatives. We have a disproportionate system that allows House Representatives to represent varying numbers of voters. For example, a California representative may be representing 300,000 voters while a Kansas Representative is representing 100,000 voters. Yet both representatives get an equal vote in the House.
Mike, that isn't correct. Each district is supposed to have roughly equal numbers of voters and every ten years the number of districts allocated to each state is changed based on the census. Granted by nine years there may be a big difference due to migration into or out of a district, but it is still supposed to be roughly equal.
Mike while what you are saying may sound sensible and easy a further examination reveals it is not. You forget other factors like geography. If each district is supposed to have say 100k people that would mean major cities would have like dozens of reps, that just not practical. Also districts are influenced by the political climates in those areas, redistricting committees often take into a account how many red or blue voters there are and try to make a district with some of both. Like the person above says it's triggered by the census and thus they are routinely adjusted.
And Bonehead should remember what group "brung him to the dance"! The GOP courted the "tea-potty" because they felt that in the end they would fall in lock-step with the rest, yet these know nothing bunch of imbeciles have NO inclination to "follow their leader", but chin up Bonehead, you'll get primaried in 2014 and maybe by then Ohioans will replace you with a democrat that actually knows what's going on!
And the lesson you should learn John is - be careful who you court and wish for, you just might get it - and it may not be the way that you want it!
Perhaps it was to remind any straying members of what happened to Leon Trotsky during his visit to Mexico.
That's easy: because the GOP has contempt for science.
It's been a laugh riot watching Boehner try to reign in the frothing at the mouth teabaggers. Good luck reasoning with zealots.
Not like the Science Committee is all about disproving there's a God anyway, that's Glenn Beck's job.
Boehner is no leader and he is over his head. He takes orders instead of giving them and constantly says things that he then retracts.
It's time for Obama to take a firm stand and require congress address the growing income gap that is at it widest ever.
Boehner is more like a hand-wringing relative trying to rehabilitate his drunk of a spouse before the spouse hits rock bottom.
The national GOP has broken into the 'liquid courage' favored by the California GOP. Unless Speaker Boehner gets them clean and sober, they will follow the California GOP into political oblivion.
Anyone else here old enough to remember when California leaned Republican in its politics? The GOP did carry California in '68, '72, '76, '80, '84, and '88 before crashing and burning in the 90's.
boehner and company are experiencing ("learning from" would be an overestimation of boehner's abilities) a painful reality: an @!$%# doesn't stop being an @!$%# when he crawls in bed with you.
Because the Republicans in Congress have so totally acted without Party discipline, doncha know?
One way to look at this is as a warning to Cantor. The other way is to see it as an opening for Cantor to cement his backing for a putsch.
a worthy viewpoint of the Grover pledge: http://www.addictinginfo.org/2012/12/03/buddhist-scholar-says-norquist-pledge-is-treason-goes-viral-video/
Dang it there you go making me go to the dictionary again! Although I admit the meaning did seem quite clear given the context in which you used it. Still I was edumacated in the south and we get offended when people use big words or math or history or civics and even fume over science!(Of course we can figure out windage and elevation , we can triangulate our position to home in on the waffle house and we love to make stink bombs and M-80s)
GOP are sick of the tea party?
Welcome to the sane side. We've been expecting you. What took you so long?
Hopefully this a move towards sanity and not just simple party politics. The GOP needs to clean up the Science Committee members and get people who actually accept the scientific method as a way to acquire new knowledge.
Wait. He did the right thing. Does this signal an end to Rachel's hallmark series "John Boehner is not good at his job"?
Finally, creeping sanity!
Let me be clear on this. John Beigner is a cowardly, gutless, small-minded creep.This my way or the highway method of doing our nations lawmaking serves no-one but the very small group of cretins involved.I have house plants with higher IQS. It does not take much thought to realise that this course of action or inaction is destructive to our country in the most fundamental way possible,These people cry and stamp their feet like toddlers wanting ice-cream and threatening to hold their breath until they get it.Please tell me. When are we going to get people to do these jobs that are not from the shallow end of the gene pool?????????????????????????????????????????????????