House Power Competition 2006
Deborah Venable
08/31/06
Now
that we’ve done some poking around in the Senate races, it’s only fair that we
take a good look at the House Power Competition. (If you folks think this is fun for me, think again, but
somebody’s gotta do it.) After all,
electing our representatives to serve in this house of Congress IS the people’s
original responsibility. The Founders
charged us with this duty, unlike their original intent for electing the Senate
representatives. The United States
House of Representatives are ALL up for re-election every two years. That’s 435 seats up for grabs, folks. Unfortunately, there are many people in this
country who do not even realize that the term for representatives is only two
years. That must be the case, for
nothing else makes sense when you take a good look at the tenure that too many
of these people have accrued.
Currently
there are 231 Republicans, 201 Democrats, and 1 Independent (Democrat) seated
in the House. Two vacant seats exist –
one in 13th congressional district of New Jersey, and one in the 22nd
congressional district of Texas.
Republicans have held a majority in the House since 1995 – currently
with a 29 seat advantage, (due to the fact that the Independent caucuses with
the Democrats.) Like I said earlier,
there is no such thing as an Independent – not really. In case anyone is having trouble with the
math, Democrats need only increase their number of seats by 15 in order to
regain House power. The “expert”
analysts seem to be in agreement that this is absolutely possible.
With
the two previously mentioned vacancies, there are 29 incumbents who are not
seeking re-election in 2006, so these 31 seats are open and really up for
grabs. That leaves 404 seats that have
become warm and comfortable enough for their occupants to want to hold
onto. Depending on which “expert”
analysts you listen to, at least 259-360 of these nice, warm seats are
“safe.” This begs the same question I
asked in the Senate Power piece – who thinks that ANY of these seats ought to
be considered safe?
Here’s
another shocker: 37 of the incumbents are running UNOPPOSED! 34 of them are Democrats and three are
Republicans. Even our most
“conservative” analysts must be considering a few more than the unopposed seats
“safe” given these numbers.
In
seven states, the analysts do not see anything to speak of that would put any
of these seats in serious competition.
Those states are: Alabama, Alaska, Delaware, Maine, Massachusetts,
Missouri, and Rhode Island. This
represents a total of 20 Democrat seats and 12 Republican seats.
Digging
a little deeper into this mess, I find it appalling that many firmly ensconced,
career politicians are holding onto their “perpetual” two-year terms for more
than ten years. This is true of three
of the seven seats in my own state of Alabama; the only seat in Alaska; four of
the eight seats in Arizona; 24 of the 53 seats in California; three of the five
seats in Connecticut; the only seat in Delaware; 10 of the 25 seats in Florida;
six of the 13 seats in Georgia; one of the two seats in Hawaii, nine of the 19
seats in Illinois; five of the nine seats in Indiana; three of the five seats
in Iowa; one of the four seats in Kansas; three of the six seats in Kentucky;
three of the seven seats in Louisiana; five of the eight seats in Maryland;
five of the 10 seats in Massachusetts; 10 of the 15 seats in Michigan; four of
the eight seats in Minnesota; three of the four seats in Mississippi; one of
the nine seats in Missouri; one of the two seats in New Hampshire; seven of the
13 seats in New Jersey; 14 of the 29 seats in New York; six of the13 seats in
North Carolina; the only seat in North Dakota; eight of the 18 seats in Ohio;
one of the five seats in Oklahoma; one of the five seats in Oregon; seven of
the 19 seats in Pennsylvania; one of the two seats in Rhode Island; two of the
six seats in South Carolina; three of the nine seats in Tennessee; 12 of the 32
seats in Texas; six of the 11 seats in Virginia; three of the nine seats in Washington;
two of the three seats in West Virginia; three of the eight seats in Wisconsin;
and the only seat in Wyoming.
This
total of 184 seats held longer than 10 years is bad enough, but when you add to
that another 48 seats held for exactly 10 years you have 232 seats that have
been warmed for 10 years or more by the same people! That is well over half the TOTAL seats available in the United
States House of Representatives, ladies and gentlemen!
Please
note that I did not include in the above numbers those currently held seats of
representatives who have decided to jump from one house of congress to the
other or climb up to the executive branch via their own states’ governors’
mansions. Seven are running for the
Senate and nine are running for governor.
Nine of these are Republicans, six are Democrats and 1 is independent
(Democrat.) The states where these
interesting races are occurring are Colorado, Florida, Hawaii, Idaho, Iowa,
Maryland, Minnesota, Nebraska, Nevada, Ohio, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Vermont, and
Wisconsin. (Republican, Tom Osborne,
from Nebraska’s 3rd District lost his gubernatorial primary,
however.) It is noteworthy, given the
text of the previous paragraph, that nine of these folks have warmed their
seats in the House already for a period of 10 years or more. Also noteworthy is the fact that 8
Republicans and 3 Democrats are retiring (not running for any other office) –
all of whom had held their seats for 10 years or, in most cases, far longer. For those paying attention to the math, 2
candidates have already lost their primary re-election bids to the House.
Okay,
if you aren’t sick yet, chew on this:
16 Congressional Districts in this country have currently sitting (and
still running) Representatives that have been in their seats for 30 years or
more! Four of these seats are held by
Republicans and 12 by Democrats.
Democrat, John Dingell, from Michigan’s 15th District was
first elected in 1955! Dave Obey,
Democrat from Wisconsin’s 7th District, was elected in 1969! All the others were elected in 1976 or
before. I would expect to find that all
these districts are perhaps the wealthiest, most desirable locations in this
country, wouldn’t you? I mean there
can’t possibly be any crime, any kind of public dissent, or anything but the
most delicious slice of the American Dream Pie to be enjoyed in these
places. Why else could these people be
continually re-elected every two years for THIRTY YEARS OR MORE?
Since
you are probably wondering where the rest of these idyllic districts are
located:
Alaska,
California, Florida, Iowa, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Missouri, Ohio,
Pennsylvania, Washington, and West Virginia are those other states. Three of the districts are in California and
two in Michigan.
Currently,
the salary of a United States Congressman, (both houses) is $165, 200 a
year. That is the “starting salary” –
the salary of certain other members, Majority and Minority Leaders, Speaker of
the House, etc. is considerably more.
The salary is due to be increased in January of 2007 by about 2%. We won’t even go into all the other perks of
the job, but there are plenty of them.
The retirement plan alone, for those who manage to make a career of the
job, is one enviable by most private sector executives. We pay these salaries, folks, along with
huge benefits and allowances too numerous and expensive to imagine for most of
us. They set the salaries and we pay
them. That’s how it works.
Since
we are so obviously their employers, and they are sent to their seats to serve
us, it only makes sense that we take the time to review their job
qualifications, their history of performance, and try to insure that they are
truly qualified to REPRESENT us in this self-governing society, don’t you
think?
If
anyone is still wondering why socialist philosophy has gotten a stranglehold on
America, consider this: With
representatives receiving such vast compensation for “government work” is it
any wonder that the main thing on voters’ minds is trying to insure more
government largesse for themselves?
“Representatives” are “working for the people” to make the people more
dependent on government for their own job security, folks. Listen real close to what politicians
promise as the election draws near.
Anything that smacks of more money in your pocket via “the government”
should beg the question; from where does the money come? We don’t send representatives to the
legislature to produce a massive nanny state in which we all can partake of
collectivism. We are supposed to send
representatives to the legislature to insure our individual liberties and
prevent the government from infringing on our future individual opportunities
to produce our own wealth, raise our own children, and pursue our own happiness
– not dependent on government handouts.
As
with the Senate race, the contest for the House is seen by the analysts as
strictly a Party Power competition.
Many voters are so sick of their own party’s shortcomings they may
decide to stay home, or worse still, cast their votes out of revenge. That is the epitome of ignorance and
apathy. There are very real
considerations for whichever party manages to grab or maintain power in the
legislature. We only have to study
history to see the effects of various party power shifts that occurred because
one or the other party fell out of favor with voters. Many of these effects have been long lasting and life
changing. These decisions we the voters
make are important. Too many have
shirked responsible decisions for too long at too great a price. We have a duty to make our choices for
representation based on facts that we glean for ourselves. There is always one choice better than
another. Those are the choices we should
strive to make if we are to be truly represented for the next two years.