Lawmakers could have kept Calvert from new post
By Kirstin Ellison
Posted on Thu May 17, 2007 at 11:47:36 AM EST
Following all the hoopla surrounding Rep. Ken Calvert's (R-CA) ascension to Rep. John Doolittle's (R-CA) seat on the House Appropriations Committee, here's a demoralizing tidbit that's come to light - lawmakers could have stopped Calvert's assignment, but didn't.
During the [voice] vote, several Republican shouts of "no" prompted the GOP to call for a show of hands, which indicated a lopsided vote in favor of Calvert's appointment, according to several GOP sources present. There was an objection to confirming the appointment by a show of hands, and at least one member called for a secret-ballot vote. But that move would have required a unanimous agreement, and at least one member objected. As a result, the effort failed, the sources said.
This week, some GOP members were still lamenting the decision.
"It's like we didn't learn anything from last year," one GOP lawmaker said, referring to the November elections and the loss of the party's majority control.
Well, it's a lesson they'll certainly get a chance to learn again if they don't change their ways. And I'm not just talking about Republicans, either - Democrats could have stopped the assignment, too, but didn't.
All committee assignments must go to the House floor for approval after the Republicans conference or the Democratic Caucus selects them. Party leaders usually bring the committee assignments to the floor through a unanimous consent agreement, which fails if even one member opposes it and calls for a recorded vote.
Under such a scenario, party leaders likely would pull the resolution to avoid forcing members to vote on a controversial committee assignment -- a vote that could be used against them in campaigns.
In fact, Republicans used this tactic earlier this year to rightly prevent Rep. William Jefferson (D-LA), he of the frozen $90,000, from taking a seat on the Homeland Security committee. Democrats could have, also rightly, given the Republicans a dose of their own medicine in Calvert's case, but didn't. The reasons for why they chose not to vary, but here's a favorite:
DCCC spokesman Doug Thornell said it is not the Democrats' responsibility to oppose GOP committee assignments, and he reiterated the group's prior criticism.
"It's the job and responsibility of John Boehner and the Republican leadership to select the members they feel best represent their values and character on these important committees," he said. "Based on their actions, they value ethically challenged members under investigation."
That's an interesting mix of truth and spin. Yes, Republicans should take it upon themselves to keep their ethically-challenged members out of important positions. But Republican Members of Congress and Democratic Members of Congress ultimately all belong to the same club - if the GOP wasn't going to stop Calvert's appointment, Democrats should have.
Tags: Ken Calvert, Ethics in Government, William Jefferson (all tags)
You are not logged in.
In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.
If not, you can make an account just by filling out the form below. It's quick and free.
