The House Minority Is the New House Majority

WASHINGTON, DC - JANUARY 16: U.S. Rep. Keith Ellison (D-MN) speaks during a news conference January 16, 2013 on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC. House Democrats held a news conference to announce new legislation to eliminate the federal debt ceiling.
National Journal
Elahe Izad
Add to Briefcase
Elahe Izad
Oct. 16, 2013, 7:56 p.m.

In a nor­mal polit­ic­al en­vir­on­ment, the minor­ity party in the House has the least clout in Con­gress. With no need for a su­per­ma­jor­ity to move con­ten­tious le­gis­la­tion or the abil­ity to block bills from the ma­jor­ity, as oc­curs in the Sen­ate, the lower cham­ber’s minor­ity his­tor­ic­ally has had a more lim­ited role in le­gis­lat­ing.

But we are not in a nor­mal polit­ic­al en­vir­on­ment. These days, the minor­ity is act­ing like the ma­jor­ity.

Ob­vi­ously House Demo­crats can’t con­trol the floor or bring up their bills. But dur­ing the past few ma­jor fisc­al fights, a nearly united House Demo­crat­ic Caucus has car­ried bills across the fin­ish line, des­pite be­ing out­numbered by Re­pub­lic­ans. The last not­able time this oc­curred was dur­ing the fisc­al-cliff show­down, in which House Re­pub­lic­an lead­er­ship was forced to put a bill up for a vote that re­ceived sup­port from more than twice as many Demo­crats as Re­pub­lic­ans. Only 16 Demo­crats voted against it, com­pared with 151 Re­pub­lic­ans.

While the Re­pub­lic­an con­fer­ence has been di­vided in these big battles, House Demo­crats have been re­mark­ably uni­fied — with some mem­bers grit­ting their teeth and cast­ing votes for bills they don’t like. Many Demo­crats at­trib­ute that to a lead­er­ship that has a proven abil­ity to de­liv­er votes.

“What counts is not how many Demo­crat­ic votes there are, what counts is how you get it to 218, and we will get it to 218,” Rep. Steve Is­rael, D-N.Y., said hours be­fore the vote on the Sen­ate agree­ment to re­open the gov­ern­ment and tem­por­ar­ily lift the debt ceil­ing.

The meas­ure passed the House late Wed­nes­day with 198 Demo­crat­ic votes, des­pite a num­ber of pro­gress­ives strongly dis­ap­prov­ing of the se­quester-driv­en fund­ing levels in­cluded in the deal.

“We hate them, but we hate the shut­down more,” said Rep. Keith El­lis­on, D-Minn., co­chair of the Con­gres­sion­al Pro­gress­ive Caucus.

“As much as we be­lieve in what we be­lieve in as pro­gress­ives, we would nev­er dream of shut­ting the gov­ern­ment down over our pri­or­it­ies. That might dis­ap­point some pro­gress­ives, but the truth is it’s just wrong for the Amer­ic­an people,” El­lis­on said. “I fer­vently want to see some real gun con­trol, some real gun safety, but I would nev­er try to wreck the coun­try over it.”

Even Rep. Rosa De­Lauro of Con­necti­c­ut — one of just 16 Demo­crats who voted against the fisc­al-cliff deal be­cause the tax rates for wealth­i­er Amer­ic­ans were still too low for her — said hours be­fore the vote on the Sen­ate agree­ment, “I’m go­ing to wait to see what it has in it, but I want to keep the gov­ern­ment open and I want to see the debt ceil­ing raised.”

“Our caucus has a sense of loy­alty to each oth­er and to our com­mon pur­pose,” said Rep. Jim Mor­an, D-Va. “There is a bond of unity. Our in­di­vidu­al dif­fer­ences and our geo­graph­ic­al dif­fer­ences can be put aside with something this im­port­ant.”

There was little grumbling among House Demo­crats leav­ing their caucus meet­ing Wed­nes­day. In­stead, there was a rauc­ous ap­plause. Not in re­sponse to “win­ning” a ne­go­ti­ation, said Rep. John Lar­son, D-Conn. “[Rep.] Jim Cly­burn told a won­der­ful story about unity, grow­ing up in South Car­o­lina.”

What We're Following See More »
CITES CONFLICT OF INTEREST
Lieberman Withdraws from Consideration for FBI Job
4 days ago
THE LATEST
MINIMUM 2 PERCENT GDP
Trump Tells NATO Countries To Pay Up
4 days ago
BREAKING
MANAFORT AND FLYNN
Russians Discussed Influencing Trump Through Aides
4 days ago
THE DETAILS

"American spies collected information last summer revealing that senior Russian intelligence and political officials were discussing how to exert influence over Donald J. Trump through his advisers." The conversations centered around Paul Manafort, who was campaign chairman at the time, and Michael Flynn, former national security adviser and then a close campaign surrogate. Both men have been tied heavily with Russia and Flynn is currently at the center of the FBI investigation into possible collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia.

Source:
BUT WHITE HOUSE MAY USE AGAINST HIM ANYWAY
Ethics Cops Clear Mueller to Work on Trump Case
6 days ago
THE LATEST

"Former FBI Director Robert Mueller has been cleared by U.S. Department of Justice ethics experts to oversee an investigation into possible collusion between then-candidate Donald Trump's 2016 election campaign and Russia." Some had speculated that the White House would use "an ethics rule limiting government attorneys from investigating people their former law firm represented" to trip up Mueller's appointment. Jared Kushner is a client of Mueller's firm, WilmerHale. "Although Mueller has now been cleared by the Justice Department, the White House may still use his former law firm's connection to Manafort and Kushner to undermine the findings of his investigation, according to two sources close to the White House."

Source:
BUSINESSES CAN’T PLEAD FIFTH
Senate Intel to Subpoena Two of Flynn’s Businesses
6 days ago
THE LATEST

Senate Intelligence Committee chairman Richard Burr (R-NC) and ranking member Mark Warner (D-VA) will subpoena two businesses owned by former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn. Burr said, "We would like to hear from General Flynn. We'd like to see his documents. We'd like him to tell his story because he publicly said he had a story to tell."

×
×

Welcome to National Journal!

You are currently accessing National Journal from IP access. Please login to access this feature. If you have any questions, please contact your Dedicated Advisor.

Login