· Main Page Overview · Rating Methodology · Senate Votes · House Votes · Cover Story: Left To Right To search the vote ratings database or view different sets of scores, go to the Main Page Overview.

By Richard E. Cohen, National Journal
© National Journal Group Inc.
Friday, March 2, 2007

During last year's campaign, congressional Republican leaders repeatedly warned voters that a Democratic takeover would shift the balance of power radically to the left. "Unapologetic liberal icons such as Reps. Henry Waxman, D-Calif., David Obey, D-Wis., John Conyers, D-Mich., Charlie Rangel, D-N.Y., and George Miller, D-Calif. -- all of whom were top Democrat leaders during the disgraced Democrat Congress of the early 1990s -- are all still in Congress, and all are poised to chair key House committees if Democrats take the majority," then-House Majority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio, wrote in a memo to other GOP lawmakers on the eve of the election. "Their liberal agenda will be back with a vengeance if they're handed the gavel."

The GOP's scare tactics apparently failed on Election Day. But what about the claim itself?

An analysis of the new House committee chairmen's scores in National Journal's 2006 vote ratings shows that they were, on average, only slightly more liberal than the entire caucus of 201 Democrats. Of the 21 chairmen, 13 had scores that were more liberal than the Democrats' midpoint, and eight had scores that were less liberal. The chairmen range from some of the most liberal Democrats to some who have been notably moderate.

Boehner's characterization of the five "liberal icons" is valid, for the most part. Miller, the new Education and Labor Committee chairman, ranked as the No. 2 liberal in the House last year, while Judiciary Committee Chairman Conyers and Ways and Means Committee Chairman Rangel were among the 19 most liberal members. In recent years, their committees typically have had a strong partisan flavor. Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman Waxman was several points below them, and Appropriations Committee Chairman Obey ranked toward the center of House Democrats -- and of the new chairmen.

But five other chairmen were among the 36 least liberal House Democrats. They include Agriculture Committee Chairman Collin Peterson of Minnesota, who tied for the fourth-most-conservative House Democrat last year, and Armed Services Committee Chairman Ike Skelton of Missouri, who ranked 13th in that category. Interestingly, these two chairmen head panels that have traditionally operated on a bipartisan basis and that this year are slated to prepare major reauthorizing legislation of their committee's programs.

The scores of the House Democratic leaders are also mixed. Speaker Nancy Pelosi of California was the 20th-most-liberal House member. But the next three Democratic leaders -- Majority Leader Steny Hoyer of Maryland, Majority Whip James Clyburn of South Carolina, and Caucus Chairman Rahm Emanuel of Illinois -- all had scores that placed them near the center of their party in the House.

Similar patterns prevailed among Senate Democrats.

Of the 19 new Senate committee chairmen, nine fell toward the liberal end of the party's spectrum in NJ's 2006 vote ratings. They included four of the five most liberal senators: Environment and Public Works Committee Chairwoman Barbara Boxer, D-Calif.; Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee Chairman Edward Kennedy, D-Mass.; Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vt.; and Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry Committee Chairman Tom Harkin, D-Iowa. As do their House counterparts, Kennedy and Leahy chair committees that are often sharply divided on ideological grounds.

Budget Committee Chairman Kent Conrad, D-N.D., was the least liberal of the new Senate chairmen and the sixth-most-conservative of last year's 45 Senate Democrats, including independent James Jeffords of Vermont. With House Budget Committee Chairman John Spratt, D-S.C., also ranking in the center of his chamber, the two fiscal watchdogs could play a significant role in forcing budget discipline on other committees. Other centrist Senate chairmen included Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus, D-Mont., and Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee Chairman Joe Lieberman, ID-Conn.

As for the scores of the Senate leaders, Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada was close to the center of his chamber's Democrats, while Majority Whip Richard Durbin of Illinois was the most liberal overall, with nearly perfect liberal scores. Charles Schumer of New York, who holds the party's No. 3 leadership post, came in slightly below Reid in the rankings.

Although congressional chairmen are positioned to play a vital role in shaping their committees' legislation and oversight, their ideology does not necessarily dictate results. A notable example came in 1993, when then-Rep. Ron Dellums, D-Calif., took the gavel as chairman of the House Armed Services Committee. During his more than 20 years in the House, Dellums had a strongly liberal voting record, and he had been a firebrand early in his career. But even though he continued to advocate massive defense cuts of $400 billion over five years and wanted to shut down the B-2 bomber program, his personal views ultimately had little impact on the panel's legislation.

"I've chaired a subcommittee for 10 years, and I have dutifully and faithfully reported out budget bills where there were a number of elements that were not what Ron Dellums wanted," he said in a 1993 interview with NJ. "The role of the chair is not that of dictator."

In both parties, committee chairmen have historically run risks if their actions were significantly out of sync with their party. In January 2005, GOP leaders ousted Rep. Chris Smith, R-N.J., as chairman of the Veterans' Affairs Committee because of his criticism of existing policy and his continuing efforts to boost veterans' benefits over the objections of fiscal conservatives.

As those examples demonstrate, balancing their own views with those of other party members is a continuing struggle for the majority party's leaders and committee chairmen. Managing an inherently unruly legislative body often forces them to set aside -- or even sacrifice -- long-held sentiments. But, as members of both parties are well aware these days, majority-party status confers other rewards.

[an error occurred while processing this directive]