House Energy & Commerce Committee Turns Sharply Left

November 20th, 2008 By: Arvak | Tags:

In a secret ballot vote, the House Democratic caucus has removed the Michigan Rep. John Dingell from his chairmanship of the Energy and Commerce panel in favor of California Rep. Henry Waxman.  The change may presage a shift in the House in favor of much more purist and extreme leftist views on a range of issues including environmental regulation as well as overall economic policy.

Coming after a summer of record high gas prices and in the midst of a global financial crisis, the shift to the left could not come at a worse time.  Waxman has a long record of harsh and unyielding partisanship and extreme demogogury.  He is prone to demonize opponents rather thanbuild bridges of compromise, as he did in his long anti-tobacco campaigns through the 1990s.  He also has little interest in issues of practicality, preferring to stick with a hard ideological agenda even in the face of contravening facts.  Given the scope of his committee’s jurisdiction over issues such as greenhouse gas emissions, Waxman’s record for extremism and intolerance poses yet another threat to the already fragile U.S. economy.

The most hard left elements of the blogosphere are already cheering this as a victory for their kind of incivility and intolerance.  They see Waxman as a much more pure ideologue that is likely to place a higher priority on confronting their enemies and is not likely to engage in hated compromise. And still smarting from the defeat of their attempted purge of Connecticut Senator Joe Lieberman, they are not inclined to hide their torches and pitchforks now:

This is a huge defeat for the Blue Dogs, who were hoping to use Dingell as a roadblock to keep any meaningful change from happening with regard to issues under the Committee’s jurisdiction — telecommunications and health care, energy and environmental protection, interstate commerce and consumer protection.

Though she never took a public position, nobody has any doubts that Nancy Pelosi orchestrated this.

This week the Senate voted to remain a bunch of self-protecting hacks by letting Lieberman keep his gavel, but the House voted for progress.

For years, moderates and centrists complained about the over-the-top extremism that too often seemed to dominate the House Republican caucus.  Now, it seems we are going to get the same political strychnine just in a different partisan flavor.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Technorati
  • SphereIt
  • NewsVine
  • TailRank
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon

This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.

  1. c3
    November 21st, 2008 at 15:55
    Reply | Quote | #1

    Will this be the first example of the House and White House slowly getting “out of sync”?

Comments are closed.

PoliGazette Comments Policy

PoliGazette encourages comments from all viewpoints, especially those that disagree. Comments submitted must, however, adhere to the following standards. Comments that violate these standards may be edited or deleted without notice at the sole discretion of the editors. Commenters who repeatedly or egregiously violate these standards or who attempt to argue publicly with editors regarding the comments policy may be banned from commenting further.

(1) Comments should address the substantive content of the post. Comments that repeatedly or blatantly misrepresent the content of the post or of others' comments are not welcome. Comments that respond to something other than which the contributor or commenter may have said are irrelevant and should not be posted.

(2) Comments should avoid vulgarity as well as racial, ethnic, religious, or sexual bigotry.

(3) Comments should not personally attack the character, personal integrity, or professional reputation of any PoliGazette contributor or of other commenters.

(4) Comments should reflect the contributions of the commenters themselves and should not include extensive cut-and-paste reproductions of others' words except insofar as necessary to supplement the commenter's own arguments. Link spam, trackback spam, and propaganda spam will be instantly deleted.

(5) Public figures are considered open to all substantive criticism of their policies and statements. Comments that present objectively false factual information about public figures (i.e. "Obama is a Muslim") or that attack public figures by attacking their families are not welcome. Comments that merely repeat slogans for or against a candidate without engaging in substantive comment are not welcome.

Questions or challenges to these policies or their application should be directed to the editors by email only.