The New Committee Lineup
Chris Dodd bucked expectations and decided to stay in charge of the Senate Banking Committee. Then Tom Harkin further bucked expectations and decided to depart from his perch at the Agriculture Committee (thought to be exactly where an Iowa Senator wants to be) and take over the HELP Committee. That leaves Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas as the chair of Agriculture, which should be good for her re-election bid.
But is it good for America? Brad Johnson notes that Lincoln is a very strident opponent of climate change legislation, calling even the post-Collin Peterson version of the legislation a “total non-starter.” And the left will have basically no leverage over her; she’s at real risk of losing her seat to a Republican, and Barack Obama is very unpopular in Arkansas. That said, the alternative to this scenario was Tim Johnson heading up Banking, so this is arguably a superior outcome. In terms of core agriculture policy issues, switching from Harkin at the top to Lincoln at the top will probably mostly make things bad in a different way. Policy less oriented toward the interests of people who grow corn, and more oriented toward the interests of Tyson Foods—purveyors of fine fast food chicken products.
25 Responses to “The New Committee Lineup”
Register
RSSLogin
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog RollAbout Matt YglesiasContact Me
Donate
September 10th, 2009 at 2:33 pm
“And the left will have basically no leverage over her unless party activists find a credible primary challenger on her left; she’s at real risk of losing her seat to a Republican, and Barack Obama is very unpopular in Arkansas.”
There, fixed it for you.
Seriously, as an Arkansan Democrat and sometime low-level political operative, I can attest to the fact that we really do have a very deep party here, if not exactly a very progressive one. That being said, just find a white, male slightly to her left and just watch how quickly her tune changes.
September 10th, 2009 at 2:36 pm
more oriented toward the interests of Tyson Foods—purveyors of fine fast food chicken products.
…fine (sic) fast food chickenesque products.
September 10th, 2009 at 2:37 pm
“Fine” meaning small?
September 10th, 2009 at 2:41 pm
#3 Nah, Tyson products are, if anything, grossly over-sized, largely due to the massive doses of hormones and anti-biotics they inject their gen-modded “chickens” with, which they then dump into rivers and streams, most of which drain into neighboring Oklahoma. Not that our neighbors don’t deserve it, mind you–after all, they gave us Inhoffe and Coburn…
September 10th, 2009 at 2:51 pm
#4: Does “they” refer to Oklahomans or to the hormones and antibiotics? Or to agricultural waste products more generally? I’m willing to entertain the hypothesis that Inhoffe and Coburn’s antics can be explained only by the pharmaceutical or mutagenic properties of agricultural effluvia. (Now, to ponder: Was that post just an excuse to use the word “effluvia”? Maybe.)
September 10th, 2009 at 3:01 pm
Reader,
According to the normal rules of English grammar, I thought that it was clearly “Oklahomans” to which I was referring with the pronoun “they” (nearest preceding substantive being the assumed antecedent of a pronoun–in this case “neighbors”).
That being said, I find your contention that the Coburn and Inhoffe’s sociopathic tendencies could be best explained by prolonged exposure to environmental toxins to be intriguing. Still, we (the State of Arkansas) had to pay them some pretty hefty reparations for Tyson’s dumping. Too bad they didn’t use some of it to ameliorate our (and the Senators’) suffering.
September 10th, 2009 at 3:02 pm
Maybe Harkin anticipates future battles on agriculture policy and would rather be able to sidestep the issue than have to take sides.
There has been a resurgent liberal effort on ag issues and Harkin may agree with these liberal folks on a lot of issues (especially non-ag issues) but of course big Ag dominates Iowa and he can’t really lead the charge for reform.
September 10th, 2009 at 3:04 pm
LOL, that’s what I get for being snarky about grammar–the second to last sentence of my last post should should read, “Still, we (the State of Arkansas) had to pay Oklahomans some pretty hefty reparations for Tyson’s dumping.”
Oh irony, thy name is English Grammar.
September 10th, 2009 at 3:09 pm
Matt- I think you’re forgetting that the ag committee unfortunately oversees commodity and commodity based derivatives. This is a big deal.
September 10th, 2009 at 3:17 pm
Oh irony, thy name is English Grammar.
Close enough for folk music.
September 10th, 2009 at 3:26 pm
Matt, in case you hadn’t noticed, chickens are just corn taken to the next level.
September 10th, 2009 at 3:49 pm
Dodd probably wants a good interest rate on his next mortgage loan.
September 10th, 2009 at 4:04 pm
Actually rice and soybeans are much bigger industries than poultry in Arkansas, and cotton follows closely behind poultry. I’m not sure what implications that has for ag policy, but it’s worth noting.
September 10th, 2009 at 4:23 pm
South and central Arkansas are practically a single gigantic industrial farm. I’ve never seen such a heavily cultivated region.
September 10th, 2009 at 4:47 pm
As I predicted several weeks ago, by next year you will only be able to purchase fruits and vegetables from you local farmers’ market or WalMart.
Only nincompoops thought Harkin would stay at Agriculture. You don’t craft a legacy beyond being the only five term Democratic Senator from Iowa by continually passing bad farm bills. Harkin was one of the driving forces in the Senate for the ADA, a champion of better student loans and will burnish his populist credentials for the next 5 years.
September 10th, 2009 at 5:09 pm
Stand up:
I agree. I think it also helps that he’s good on labor issues, especially with EFCA as the next big bill heading down the pike.
September 10th, 2009 at 5:34 pm
That said, the alternative to this scenario was Tim Johnson heading up Banking, so this is arguably a superior outcome.
Because Dodd is doing a great job protecting the little guy from the financial industry?
This musical chair game doesn’t matter: a corporate whore always ends up in charge. Unless Bernie Sanders gets to be in charge of every committee.
September 10th, 2009 at 7:27 pm
Here’s my question: Could the left finish her off (metaphorically and through the elections process; please don’t call the FBI)? It seems to me that if she’s not the difference between 49 and 50 (and she’s not) or between 59 and 60 (and she’s not, because neither Lieberman nor Nelson is a reliable Dem) then she’s a liability, because she’s essentially Olympia Snowe but with a Democratic committee chair. If progressives can actually campaign against her and help to defeat her, the Senate might actually get slightly MORE progressive in ways that count (depending on who her replacement on Ag might be) and at the same time we’ll be able to give the Blue Dogs an incentive not to move too far to the right.
September 10th, 2009 at 7:37 pm
Since Kennedy’s death, I’ve been waiting for the angst to break out about the arguably more interesting speculations on his other committee, Armed Services. As a Pollan fan, I agree with the worries on Ag, but this state of affairs was baked in around the time the country agreed on Manifest Destiny.
Kennedy was HELP chairman, but he also had a lower ranked spot on Armed Services. In fact, he was second on the seniority list, at least going by the order of membership listed on its website. This left him entitled to a subcommittee chair, Seapower. Next on the list at Seapower is Joe Lieberman. He’d probably really like a promotion over his current subcom chair at Airland, since Groton, CT is home to Electric Boat, maker of fine nuclear submarines. He’s also next in line on its list. In an ideal world, Reid would use Sealand and the pork Joe could deliver to the folks back home to extract further concessions from JL. Yet not one interview with Reid I’ve seen has asked about this committee, despite how he was pushed on how he would manage Lieberman just last winter. I honestly expected more wailing and gnashing of teeth on this point, but I guess we’re all focused on healthcare. Perhaps most Dems are thinking of our land wars in Asia when thoughts turn to Armed Services, too.
There’s also the question of who will be the new low Dem on the Armed Services totem pole. My money would have been on Webb or Hagan to help them out, but they’re already there. So I predict the Air Force, Lockheed, &c. will find a new reason to make nice to Bennett, since he’s polling low. If that happens, it could trigger other moves. Or it might not happen at all, because Udall is already on AS. Are there other vulnerable Dems with large bases who might want to be on Armed Services? Gillibrand and West Point/Kings Point is the only other to come to mind. KG is bottom Dem at Foreign Affairs, and is young. Might she have the patience to start rebuilding the Dem image on defense?
September 10th, 2009 at 8:43 pm
BubbaDave,
With the right candidate, probably, but you’re never going to elect anything that a north-easterner or a west-coaster would recognize as a progressive.
The closest you’ll get is probably Lt. Governor Bill Halter, who made his money cashing in on his Clinton Admin. credentials in the Silicone Valley area before coming back to Arkansas to run for Gov., then Lite Gov. He’s not wildly popular in Arkansas, but he’s more popular than Blanche, and unlike any of her Republican challengers, he actually has good name recognition state-wide.
Could he win? Maybe, but just by running, he’d go a long way toward changing Blanche’s political calculus on a number of key issues.
September 10th, 2009 at 8:46 pm
While I’m at it, one more thing Halter has going for him is age. He’s in his early forties, so if he could win the seat, he could hang onto it for a good, long while.
September 10th, 2009 at 11:00 pm
I’m not talking about a progressive from Arkansas– that would be gravy, but seems unlikely. I’m talking about playing spoiler, deliberately sinking Lincoln, in order to send a message to the other Blue Dogs. The downside– we lose an alleged Democrat. The upside– we send a message to other wavering Dems that they need to worry about their left flank and can’t just count on liberals to vote for anything with a pulse and a (D).
September 11th, 2009 at 3:48 am
Again, probably, but, for the very reason I cited for the feasibility of replacing Blanche with another Democrat–the depth and strength of the state party–I think that would be a horrible idea in this case.
In case you haven’t noticed, we don’t exactly have too many Congressional Democrats from the south left–not too many more than the other side has from the northeast. Unlike the rest of the south, Arkansas didn’t switch massively over to the Republicans during the 70’s and 80’s, and our state Republican party is something of a joke, even now. In those circumstances, It would be a shame to flat-out torpedo a Democrat and just hand them a seat which, given the inordinate power which our system lends to incumbency, could then stay in their hands through sheer inertia for years to come.
Furthermore, I have been thinking about this some more, and I have an even better candidate than Lt. Gov Halter: Gen. Wesley Clark. He’s got great fund-raising connections, says the right things on most any progressive issue, and has instant name recognition. He would be, in my opinion, a great voice for the progressive perspective on National Security issues. (Now, he does have the little “Scarlet L” [lobbyist] problem, but that didn’t stop Haley Barbour from becoming Governor of Mississippi…)
September 11th, 2009 at 10:00 am
How, exactly, does Agriculture have any jurisdiction over climate change legislation?
September 11th, 2009 at 12:05 pm
I would drink gallons of fermented chicken drink to change the way we do committee chairs in Congress.