The leadership of the House has remained officially neutral in the presidential race, but most of the chairmen and chairwomen have expressed a preference. Some of these chairpersons wield more power than others, but collectively they are a good measure of how the power in the House was divided. Clinton clearly benefited from the fact that the New York delegation fell in line, while no Illinois Democrats hold any chairs.
Agriculture– Colin Peterson (D-MN)- Undeclared
Appropriations– David Obey (D-WI)- Obama
Armed Services– Ike Skelton (D-MO)- Clinton
Budget– Jack Spratt (D-SC)- Undeclared, but told Clinton on Wednesday that the could not endorse her.
Education– George Miller (D-CA)- Obama
Energy Independence and Global Warming– Edward Markey (D-MA)- Undeclared
Energy and Commerce– John Dingell (D-MI)- Clinton (currently ineligible to vote)
Ethics– Stephanie Tubbs-Jones (D-OH)- Clinton
Financial Services– Barney Frank (D-MA)- Clinton
Foreign Affairs– Howard Berman (D-CA)- Undeclared
Homeland Security– Bennie Thompson (D-MS)- Obama
House Administration– Bob Brady (D-PA)- Undeclared, but has said he will vote his district, and his district voted for Obama
Intelligence– Silvestre Reyes (D-TX)- Clinton
Judiciary– John Conyers (D-MI)- Obama (currently ineligible to vote)
Natural Resources– Nick Rahall (D-WV)- Obama
Oversight and Government Reform– Henry Waxman (D-CA)- Undeclared
Rules– Louise Slaughter (D-NY)- Clinton
Science– Bart Gordon (D-TN)- Undeclared
Small Business– Nydia Velazquez (D-NY)- Clinton
Transportation– James Oberstar (D-MN)- Obama
Veterans’ Affairs– Bob Filner (D-CA)- Undeclared
Ways and Means– Charlie Rangel (D-NY)- Clinton
That breaks down to 8 chairs for Clinton, 8 chairs undeclared, and 7 chairs for Obama. The most powerful chair is Appropriations, where Obama has an ally in David Obey. But Clinton has an advantage with the next three most powerful chairs: Armed Services (Skelton), Ways & Means (Rangel), and Finance (Franks). It’s basically a wash. Yet, a look at the leadership throws the balance to Obama. There is no doubt that Speaker Pelosi and Majority Whip Jim Clyburn favor Obama. Senior Chief Deputy Whip John Lewis flipped his endorsement from Clinton to Obama. Majority Leader Steny Hoyer is impossible to read, and Democratic Caucus Chair Rahm Emanuel has remained completely neutral but admitted yesterday that Obama is the presumptive nominee. There is a modest pro-Obama tilt in the House.
The Senate is a totally different story. Senators have worked with both Obama and Clinton for years and they know them well. Endorsing one over the other is not an attractive prospect because they don’t want to alienate the eventual president and they don’t want to have to go to work every day with someone that is harboring resentment because they endorsed their opponent. Nevertheless, most of the senators have made an endorsement, and most of them chose Obama. This trend is even more pronounced among the chairpersons.
Aging– Herb Kohl (D-WI)- Undeclared
Agriculture– Tom Harkin (D-IA)- Undeclared
Appropriations– Robert Byrd (D-WV)- Undeclared
Armed Services– Carl Levin (D-MI)- Undeclared (currently ineligible to vote)
Banking– Chris Dodd- Obama
Budget– Kent Conrad (D-ND)- Obama
Commerce– Daniel Inouye (D-HI)- Clinton
Energy– Jeff Bingaman (D-NM)- Obama
Environment– Barbara Boxer (D-CA)- Clinton
Finance– Max Baucus (D-MT)- Undeclared
Foreign Relations– Joe Biden (D-DE)- Undeclared
Health, Education, Labor & Pensions– Edward Kennedy (D-MA)- Obama
Homeland Security & Govern. Affairs– Joe Lieberman (I-CT)- Ineligible to vote, endorsed McCain
Indian Affairs– Byron Dorgan- Obama
Intelligence– Jay Rockefeller (D-WV)- Obama
Judiciary– Patrick Leahy (D-VT)- Obama
Rules– Diane Feinstein (D-CA)- Clinton
Small Business– John Kerry (D-MA)- Obama
Veterans’ Affairs– Daniel Akaka- Undeclared
Eight out of nineteen chairs have endorsed Obama, while only three have endorsed Clinton (Boxer, Feinstein, and Inouye). The remainder remained neutral, except Lieberman who endorsed McCain. Majority Leader Harry Reid has remained neutral, but Majority Whip Dick Durbin has endorsed Obama.
Overall, the leadership of the Senate strongly prefers Obama. What will be interesting to see is how Clinton gets reintegrated back into the Senate. She has no real seniority on any committee, and definitely has little to no support for getting a position in the leadership. Most senators opposed her presidential run and will not want to give her power to exact revenge. I honestly think she will find the workplace too hostile to merit another term.
I agree. I think too that if she had bowed out gracefully right after Super Tuesday she would have had a productive career in the Senate. She gambled a lot and lost much in money, prestige and good will. Ambition unbridled can be very costly.
Sometimes, our greatest gifts involve knowledge of ourselves.
Damn, do you really think the Senate will hold a grudge that bad?
I know that Hillary’s been in the gutter, and that politicians’ egos are by definition huge. But I can work with people I’ve had conflicts with in the past, even become friends with them. So can most of you, I guess.
Kind of scary to think that Washington’s full of people who can’t.
The Senate is based on collegiality, and Clinton has hoisted a virtual finger towards everyone who wasn’t with her, shedding blood in our own house as it were, so it’s not just an ego thing – it’s a “just desserts” thing, and it’s time for Hillary to drink up the full measure of what she has coming: silence.
is a historical artifact. The current reality is much closer to the behavior in the “other body” as the senators call it. Ask John Glenn.
I am hoping we have even more switch their endorsement or announce an endorsement soon so we can put an end to this farce.
This race will end when those with the power to end it find the backbone to end it. Folks who want Clinton to drop out before this are asking her to take those “superdelegates” off the hook.
“I honestly think she will find the workplace too hostile to merit another term.”
Yet another reason for Plan 2012.
I don’t think that the Clintons are bigger than the Democratic Party within the Democratic Party. That is, I think Plan 2012 is viable or even makes sense.
I’m wondering about Evan Bayh. Given that big victory he delivered for Hillary, I wonder if he’s become the Al Wynn of Dem politics in Indiana.
By that I mean, like Wynn, he was seen as the big fish that was “running things” only to find that maybe his grip wasn’t as tight as he thought.
In the case of Wynn, as many of you know, a very narrow win over Donna Edwards amounted to a big loss, and in their next contest, she prevailed–handily. I know the situations aren’t perfectly analogous, but I’d be interested to know.
After reading this post and comments, and thinking back over the events of last few months, it just hit me: the reaction of the Democratic Party, mainly in the role of superdelegates, to Hillary’s campaign. It’s been quiet, gradual, very understated, but really quite extraordinary, especially if you compare it to the way things usually work in politics. I think the party is essentially rejecting the Clintons, with the realization that from now on, they (the Clintons) will have as much or as little power in the party as the rest of them choose to let her have. And I don’t think they are inclined to let her have very much. This idea of Hillary as Senate Majority Leader has always struck me as completely out of line, but especially now. It’s another one of those pipe dreams her people started floating as soon as they realized she might not win the nomination.