MyDD :: Waxman with the TKO in Two Rounds

Waxman with the TKO in Two Rounds

by Jonathan Singer, Thu Nov 20, 2008 at 12:24:26 PM EST

Rep. Henry Waxman -- a liberal ally of Speaker Nancy Pelosi -- has wrested the chairmanship of the powerful House Energy and Commerce Committee from veteran Rep. John Dingell when the new Congress convenes in January.

Waxman, a California liberal and avid environmentalist and booster of health care programs, toppled Dingell Thursday on a vote of 137-122 in the Democratic Party caucus, capping a bitter fight within party ranks.

Dingell has been the top Democrat on the panel for 28 years and is an old-school supporter of the auto industry. Waxman has complained that the committee has been too slow to address environmental issues like global warming.

As I said yesterday, I really did not know how this vote was going to go down today, and was at least somewhat skeptical Henry Waxman was going to be able to pull this one off. Yet despite all of the talk of the House Democratic caucus being conservative (remember all of the discussion about the Heath Shulers of the caucus in the aftermath of the 2006 midterms making it seem like the party as a whole was right of center), House Democrats remain quite progressive and could serve as the most progressive voice in negotiations with the Senate and the White House over legislation in the coming Congress.

Tags: 111th Congress, House Democrats, Henry Waxman, John Dingell (all tags)

Permalink :: 16 Comments :: Post a Comment

gate crashing (2.00 / 1)

A terrific victory. Topple the walls.

by Jerome Armstrong on Thu Nov 20, 2008 at 12:29:38 PM EST

Re: Waxman with the TKO in Two Rounds (2.00 / 1)

Maybe the House Democrats have more integrity than those Senate Democrats. I feel a tad better on hearing this news.

by Pravin on Thu Nov 20, 2008 at 12:31:28 PM EST

Re: Waxman with the TKO in Two Rounds (none / 0)

You know, it's barely possible that people can make decisions and cast votes with which you strongly disagree and it not being a matter of their lacking integrity.

I wanted Lieberman gone. I wonder what's in Obama's mind behind his signal that it was okay to let Lieberman keep his chair. But I don't question Obama's integrity nor those who voted to let Lieberman keep his chair.

I'm disappointed, certainly. But the fact that their calculus does not align with mine isn't cause for me to question integrity.

All that said, Waxman for Dingell is a far more significant, far more substantive change, than whether or not Lieberman kept his chair or not.

by InigoMontoya on Thu Nov 20, 2008 at 01:09:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Waxman with the TKO in Two Rounds (none / 0)

I understand that there are disagreements. I dont agree with even Dean or Feingold on some things. I do not say they lack integrity. I disagree with many lefty liberals on many things.

The way the Senate went about this whole thing lacked integrity. I have never seen them bend over to accomodate another person as they have for Lieberman. And the way the senators kept changing the requirements what Lieberman needed to do make things rights were vague enough to suspect their movitves - like Bayh's laughable demand for an apology or Reid implying if it were upto him, Lieberman would be stripped, but then Reid personally puts in a good word for lieberman before the vote. Also Time magazine had an article which pretty much laid out what happened and that opponents of Lieberman weren't given many options. If Lieberman was a junior senator who wasn't their buddy, I doubt they would be spending so much time appeasing him. It was all about friendship for a lot of the senators.

And as I mentioned elsewhere, regardless of the decision made, Harry Reid still had no right to refer to him as a Democrat. Lieberman ceased being one once he rejected the results of the primary. If the senators had any integrity, they would at least have gotten Lieberman to investigate some of the Bush mistakes to hold people accountable.

I am sick of senators looking out for themselves. Without accountability, you will always give hope for future crooks and incompentent public officials that they can get away with it.

by Pravin on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 02:56:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Waxman with the TKO in Two Rounds (2.00 / 1)

Earth wins! Earth wins!

Ever heard of a Blue Moose Democrat?

by Nathan Empsall on Thu Nov 20, 2008 at 12:32:24 PM EST

Re: Waxman with the TKO in Two Rounds (2.00 / 1)

I'm glad for Waxman's win, but the one problem is that the overall narrative is not one that the Democrats want right now:

"Liberal Beverley Hills Senator Ousts Long-time Blue-Collar Champion".

Don't get me wrong, I think this is a good development. But it would be nice if the blue-collar champion were the liberal in this fight.

by the mollusk on Thu Nov 20, 2008 at 12:43:24 PM EST

Re: Waxman with the TKO in Two Rounds (2.00 / 2)

A quick googling of the headlines related to this reveals these narratives:

"Waxman's Win Marks Seismic Shift in House"

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/capitol -briefing/2008/11/what_waxmans_win_means .html?hpid=topnews

...represents a huge shift in the way the Democratic Caucus runs itself, and in the broader culture that has developed over decades...

1) Seniority Is Dead....Now, there are some nervous chairmen out there. If Dingell can be beaten, why not Ways and Means Chairman Charlie Rangel (D-N.Y.) or Judiciary Chairman John Conyers (D-Mich.)? Yes, those chairmen will support each other, just as most probably voted for Dingell. But there are a lot more members in the Democratic Caucus who aren't chairmen than members who are, and many of them would like their own shots at a gavel someday.

Also nervous today -- lobbyists. The seniority system has made it easy for K Street to know who will be in charge of a committee tomorrow...

Dingell simply does not represent the majority of Democrats' views on environmental issues, and until today, he suffered no consequences for that.

Now, he's suffering, and the next time a chairman decides to use his committee to advance the interests of his district while ignoring the interests of most of his colleagues, he might think twice.

the other headlines:

In Battle of Congressional Clout, Waxman Whacks Dingell

http://www.time.com/time/politics/articl e/0,8599,1860948,00.html

House Energy & Commerce Committee Turns Sharply Left

Shake-up in Congress aids Obama on global warming plans

http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/11/20/a merica/transition.php

Waxman's Ascent Could Foreshadow Good Relations Between President And House

http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsm emo.com/2008/11/waxmans_ascent_could_for eshado.php

The top priorities for Obama right now are developing alternative energy, passing health care reform, and climate. Waxman represents the progressive viewpoint in all 3 areas, a very positive development for us.

by devilrays on Thu Nov 20, 2008 at 04:04:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Waxman with the TKO in Two Rounds (2.00 / 2)

This is about a hundred times more important to me than Lieberman keeping his chair. Maybe House Democrats do have some interest in getting serious about climate change after all.

by lorax on Thu Nov 20, 2008 at 12:50:31 PM EST

Re: Waxman with the TKO in Two Rounds (none / 0)

This is fantastic - both in-and-of-itself, and also as a window into where house democrats are at right now.

When you start out making the "slippery slope" argument, where do you draw the line?

by Jess81 on Thu Nov 20, 2008 at 12:53:12 PM EST

Re: Waxman with the TKO in Two Rounds (none / 0)

This was not a ideological battle at all, and has nothing to do with the caucus being "progressive." This was purely a generational and geographic thing. There are 70 some odd freshman or sophomore Dems, almost all of whom voted for "change" over anything Dingell or Waxman represents, and who are nowhere near seniority anyway so there's not much Dingell or his allies can do to them. Plus the California delegation is a sixth of the caucus by itself. And not insignificantly, Dingell looks awful these days. He's in a wheelchair and, although I hear he's fine in reality, really does seem like he's on his deathbed. He does not seem like a scary, powerful man at all.

by ColoradoGuy on Thu Nov 20, 2008 at 12:55:41 PM EST

Re: Waxman with the TKO in Two Rounds (none / 0)

For me progressive doesnt equate to liberal. Progressive for me is about getting things done whatever ideology it is. Liberalism is just an ideology, the execution of many of its tenets possibly being progressive.

I do not give a damn what ideology some of these old people in the senate and house subscribe to. If they are not dynamic enough to bring change, they must go. That is why I hate the senate seniority system. You choose the most qualified person. Not the oldest stalest poitician.

by Pravin on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 03:00:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

All I can say is (none / 0)

Ding Dong the Witch is Dead.
As an employee at a competetor to the legacy Telecom companies I am excited that Dingell is gone.

I am sorry, Dingell was never an ally to the common man, but to the executives at bloated, legacy companies.

America will be much better off without him at the helm of this important committee. Not only will energy issues finally be taken seriously, but other regulations might actually finally be enforced.

by gavoter on Thu Nov 20, 2008 at 01:55:42 PM EST

First sign of hope (none / 0)

with Obama packing his cabinet with pro-war hacks from the Clinton era and making nice with traitor Lieberman, this is the first good news for progressive, and dare I say....LIBERAL Democrats. Bravo!

by pascal1947 on Thu Nov 20, 2008 at 02:05:03 PM EST

Re: First sign of hope (none / 0)

Pish. Pro-war hacks from the Clinton era? A downright stupid comment.

Daschle may not be a progressive in the conventional sense, but his major focus has been on passing UNIVERSAL health care, which is one of the most important goals of progressives. How is he a pro-war hack in any event? A laughable description of Daschle, who has been decidedly anti-war throughout.

Napolitano at Homeland security is a progressive who actually advanced a progressive agenda in a Republican state instead of hiding behind her states' conservative nature and playing it safe.

Holder served in the Clinton administration, but anyone with any sought-after experience did at some point. He is hardly a hack.

Podesta pro-war? Really?

http://www.envirosagainstwar.org/know/re ad.php?itemid=6288

The most mainstream liberal Democratic think tank, the Center for American Progress, headed by Bill Clinton's former Chief of Staff, John Podesta, strongly advocates for a one-year withdrawal of all American troops.
...
In taking these strong positions, Podesta has defined himself as a far stronger and more progressive peace advocate than even the former President and would-be President he once served. On October 11, Podesta's team issued a memo critical of what they called "strategic drift" among the front-running Democrats and their national security advisers.

While Waxman is certainly a first-rate progressive champion and I agree that this is a great victory for the progressive direction the country has been rapidly moving towards, to say that the cabinet is being packed with Clinton-era pro-war hacks is beyond ridiculous.

by devilrays on Thu Nov 20, 2008 at 04:19:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]

It's odd (2.00 / 1)

It's interesting reading coverage of this on national blogs versus coverage in the Michigan netroots. Here, Dingell is the enemy and this is a great victory. In Michigan, the Democratic Party has turned its back on a great statesman and has doomed Michigan for decades.

I think the truth is somewhere in between and, despite being a proud Michigan Democrat, here are my thoughts:

Dingell was never as good on energy and the environment as I'd like, and he's close to the UAW and to the auto executives. But he's a Michigan politician, so it's hard not to be. Really, when you line him up against almost any Republican, Dingell is fantastic.

Even so, when we're looking at massive changes in this country's economy and when we're facing global climate change, a major crisis, John Dingell wasn't the right guy to be leading this committee.

At the same time, he is no enemy to progressives, either. He's an old-school, establishment Democrat, but he's a good guy who's been fighting for progressive causes for longer than most of us have been alive. Is he perfect? No. But I'd take him before any Blue Dog. On a lot of fights, he's one of the good guys and he still has a role to play in shaping legislation.

Dingell is still on the committee and is still important to the process, and anything Waxman tries to do will need his support. I think it'll turn out well in the end.

I'm also hoping that Dingell can become a proud voice for health care reform once again.

Those are my thoughts, anyway.

Walberg Watch - Following Radical Conservative Rep. Tim Walberg in MI-07

by Fitzy on Thu Nov 20, 2008 at 04:05:31 PM EST

Re: It's odd (none / 0)

Thanks for this comment. I agree that this is a positive development, but honestly Dingell was a good voice on many environmental issues. Plus the Democratic coalition which includes both unions and environmentalists is an uneasy alliance with few simple answers. In all, I think Waxman is the way forward, but I don't think Dingell was terrible either.

by the mollusk on Thu Nov 20, 2008 at 05:13:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

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 right here. It's quick and free.