A potential change to long-standing House rules that would limit the time spent in top committee spots for both parties is drawing mixed reviews from lawmakers — and not just along partisan lines.
The move being considered by House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, first reported by Punchbowl News, is one of several operational changes for the chamber the California Republican and his leadership team are considering. House Republicans need to net five seats in the 435-member chamber to claim the majority the party lost in 2018.
McCarthy is in line to become speaker in a GOP majority, and the move would impose on House Democrats the same committee membership rules that have been in place for Republicans since 1995: six years, or three terms, as a panel chairman or ranking member, no matter which party is in the majority.
MARJORIE TAYLOR GREENE’S CAMPAIGN COMMITTEE REPORTS FIRST NET LOSS
Traditionally, House party conferences have decided their own membership rosters. But many House Republicans are eager for revenge against House Democrats, led by Speaker Nancy Pelosi of California. Republicans have been vocal in their criticisms of Democrats’ decision to remove conservative firebrand Reps. Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia and Paul Gosar of Arizona following a string of controversies. Top GOP lawmakers, including McCarthy, have vowed to remove Democratic members who have been entrenched in controversies if they take back control.
But those opposed to the rules change argue that it would be out of line.
“I think each side should determine how they populate their committees. Otherwise, every time the House flips, it will escalate,” said a lawmaker. “I get that there has to be some reaction to Speaker Pelosi’s abuses. But if we go down this road too far, then the majority is going to be able to silence entire constituencies in the future.”
Democrats emphasized the move would be a grave overreaction.
“MTG and Gosar were kicked off their committees because Kevin McCarthy is too weak and feckless to do the job leaders are supposed to do when their members do reprehensible things,” one senior Democratic aide said. “Changing the entire seniority system for both caucuses is a vast overreach of a majority’s power … like bringing a bazooka to a sword fight. It is not similar at all to what Democrats did.”
Others contend the move would have the inadvertent effect of helping House Democrats ease their logjam of senior party members in key committee slots. It might have some appeal with younger members, who would otherwise have to wait years, even decades, to move up.
One senior source noted that some Democrats have called for changes in committee leadership on certain panels.
“It’s a dumb idea. Why help them?” a senior GOP aide said.
Republicans imposed term limits on the heads of committees in 1994, with a waiver required to remain in the position.
Still, GOP lawmakers seem open to the idea of broadening the committee spot term limits to the entire House.
“It’s a great idea. I fully support it,” said Rep. Matt Gaetz, a Florida Republican.
Others said they’re still learning about details of the proposal but are inclined to back it.
CLICK HERE FOR MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER
“I read about Kevin‘s idea for the first time this morning, and it is not something he has discussed with us yet,” one senior GOP lawmaker told the Washington Examiner. “My own view, and I suspect the view of many rank-and-file members, is that it would be a very good idea. As a general premise, we [conservatives] believe in merit-based leadership appointments and not seniority.”
