Senate Committee Assignments

I list them in the extended entry. I would be lying if I said I understood the full scope of each, or really any, of these committees, so basically I am just going to submit them without comment.

Anticipated Committee Democratic Assignments for the 110th Congress
(Subject to Negotiations Following Republican Leadership Elections)

Agriculture        
CHAIR:  Harkin
Leahy
Conrad
Baucus
Lincoln
Stabenow
Nelson (Ne)
Salazar
Brown
Casey
Klobuchar

Appropriations
CHAIR:  Byrd
Inouye
Leahy
Harkin
Mikulski
Kohl
Murray
Dorgan
Feinstein
Durbin
Johnson
Landrieu
Reed
Lautenberg
Nelson (Ne)

Armed Services
CHAIR:  Levin
Kennedy
Byrd
Lieberman
Reed
Akaka
Nelson (Fl)
Nelson (Ne)
Bayh
Clinton
Pryor
Webb
McCaskill

Banking
CHAIR:  Dodd
Johnson
Reed
Schumer
Bayh
Carper
Menendez
Akaka
Brown
Casey
Tester

Commerce
CHAIR:  Inouye
Rockefeller
Kerry
Dorgan
Boxer
Nelson (Fl)
Cantwell
Lautenberg
Pryor
Carper
McCaskill
Klobuchar

Energy
CHAIR:  Bingaman
Akaka
Dorgan
Wyden
Johnson
Landrieu
Cantwell
Salazar
Menendez
Lincoln
Sanders
Tester

Environment Public Works
CHAIR:  Boxer
Baucus
Lieberman
Carper
Clinton
Lautenberg
Cardin
Sanders
Klobuchar
Whitehouse

Finance
CHAIR:  Baucus
Rockefeller
Conrad
Bingaman
Kerry
Lincoln
Wyden
Schumer
Stabenow
Cantwell
Salazar

Foreign Relations
CHAIR:  Biden
Dodd
Kerry
Feingold
Boxer
Nelson (Fl)
Obama
Menendez
Cardin
Casey
Webb

HELP
CHAIR:  Kennedy
Dodd
Harkin
Mikulski
Bingaman
Murray
Reed
Clinton
Obama
Sanders
Brown

Homeland and Government Affairs
CHAIR:  Lieberman
Levin
Akaka
Carper
Pryor
Landrieu
Obama
McCaskill
Tester

Judiciary
CHAIR:  Leahy
Kennedy
Biden
Kohl
Feinstein
Feingold
Schumer
Durbin
Cardin
Whitehouse

Intelligence
CHAIR:  Rockefeller
Levin
Feinstein
Wyden
Bayh
Mikulski
Feingold
Whitehouse

Budget
CHAIR:  Conrad
Murray
Wyden
Feingold
Johnson
Byrd
Nelson (Fl)
Stabenow
Menendez
Cardin
Sanders
Whitehouse

Aging
CHAIR:  Kohl
Wyden
Lincoln
Bayh
Carper
Nelson (Fl)
Clinton
Salazar
Casey
McCaskill
Whitehouse

Veterans
CHAIR:  Akaka
Rockefeller
Murray
Obama
Sanders
Brown
Webb
Tester

Small Business
CHAIR:  Kerry
Levin
Harkin
Lieberman
Landrieu
Cantwell
Bayh
Pryor
Cardin
Tester

Rules
CHAIR:  Feinstein
Dodd
Byrd
Inouye
Schumer
Durbin
Nelson (Ne)
Dorgan
Murray
Pryor

Joint Economic
CHAIR:  Schumer
Kennedy
Bingaman
Klobuchar
Casey
Webb

Indian Affairs
CHAIR:  Dorgan
Inouye
Conrad
Akaka
Johnson
Cantwell
McCaskill
Tester

Tags: Democrats, Senate 2008 (all tags)

Comments

70 Comments

Judiciary looks pretty good

No likely-to-bolt and approve Alito Part 2 Dems on there.

Whitehouse and Cardin both added.  Good stuff.  Leahy as chair - outstanding.

by scientician 2006-11-14 11:39AM | 0 recs
Re: Judiciary looks pretty good

My thoughts exactly.  Glad Casey wasn't placed on Judiciary committee.  It looks like, for the most part, freshmen were placed on the committees where they are strongest (with "strongest" being defined as which issues I agree most with them :) )

Tester has got to be disappointed with these appointments, though.  No Agriculture or Appropriations?

by Fran for Dean 2006-11-14 12:08PM | 0 recs
Re: Judiciary looks pretty good

Baucus is already on Ag.

Brown and Sanders on HELP! YESSSSS! That WILL be the kick-ass committee (as much as such a thing can exist).

by adamterando 2006-11-14 12:17PM | 0 recs
Re: Judiciary looks pretty good

chaired by Kennedy!!

by faithfull 2006-11-14 12:48PM | 0 recs
Re: Judiciary looks pretty good

Leahy chairs Judiciary.  Kennedy chairs HELP.

by Sandwich Repairman 2006-11-15 05:30AM | 0 recs
Re Brown; Health, Education, Labor and Pensions.

Bless my 401K.

Make up for that horrible vote on that "T" bill.  T as in Torture.

by ThosJoseph 2006-11-14 02:16PM | 0 recs
Re: Judiciary looks pretty good

Reid's choices for Jud are perhaps the best stroke of genius out there.  Not only are all the sens appointed likely to blcok judges from an ideology standpoint, they all come from blue states so there's no pressure and protection from their red state constituents to approve a conservative judge.

by jgarcia 2006-11-14 01:05PM | 0 recs
Re: Judiciary looks pretty good

It's the exact same committee from the prior Congress, with the only newcomers being Whitehouse (former state AG, clear choice) and Cardin (career politician; doesn't bring a ton to the table except a law degree).

by Steve M 2006-11-14 04:39PM | 0 recs
I Thought Reid Promised Tester a Spot on Appropr.

Hmm, that could be trouble if people voted for him for that reason.

by Wanderer 2006-11-14 11:41AM | 0 recs
Re: I Thought Reid Promised Tester a Spot

Yeah, and it's also surprising that he didn't get a seat on Agriculture.  But Casey did?

by Colorado Luis 2006-11-14 11:46AM | 0 recs
Re: I Thought Reid Promised Tester a Spot

It makes more sense to switch Tester on Energy and Brown on Agriculture, since one of the major issues that Brown ran on was energy independence.

by ignatzmouse 2006-11-14 12:05PM | 0 recs
Re: I Thought Reid Promised Tester a Spot

I thought the same thing, but it was pointed out to me that there is already one MT Senator on the Ag committee.  He is on energy, which is where he sees the revolution coming.

by juls 2006-11-14 12:06PM | 0 recs
Re: I Thought Reid Promised Tester a Spot

No surprise, because believe it or not, agriculture
is Pennsylvania's largest industry.

Otherwise, Casey got good committee assignments although I'm a little surprised he got on Foreign Relations and not labor, but maybe Joint Economic
fills the same bill.

by phillydem 2006-11-14 01:16PM | 0 recs
Re: I Thought Reid Promised Tester a Spot

Appropriations didn't receive any of the new senators, so I don't think they deliberately kept Tester off. Putting Casey on Ag instead of Tester was a real surprise, but at least they put Tester on Small Business.

by grayslady 2006-11-14 12:01PM | 0 recs
Re: I Thought Reid Promised Tester a Spot

I figure Casey's ag spot is to help him maintain popularity in the rural part of PA between Pittsburgh and Philly.

Besides, Baucus is on the ag cmte, and as far as I know it's unorthodox to have 2 sens from the same state on the same cmte. (Indeed, skimming this list, I can't find a single instance here where that is the case --  mighty coincidental unless intentional.)

by EliWho 2006-11-14 12:08PM | 0 recs
Re: I Thought Reid Promised Tester a Spot

Kohl and Feingold are both on Judiciary, but that may be an exception. However, it would indicate that there is no rule disallowing to senators from the same state to be on the same committee.

by grayslady 2006-11-14 12:26PM | 0 recs
Re: I Thought Reid Promised Tester a Spot

Here's a bit of a primer on the whole deal:

Standing Committees (16)

Standing committees are permanent bodies with specific responsibilities spelled out in the Senate's official rules. For purposes of member assignment, Senate committees are divided, according to relative importance, into three categories: Class A, Class B, and Class C. Senators are limited to service on two Class A committees and one Class B committee. Assignment to Class C committees is made without reference to a member's service on any other panels.

Twelve of the sixteen current standing committees are Class A panels. They are Agriculture; Appropriations; Armed Services; Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs; Commerce, Science, and Transportation; Energy and Natural Resources; Environment and Public Works; Finance; Foreign Relations; Governmental Affairs; Judiciary; and Labor and Human Resources. Somewhat less prestigious, but vital to the Senate's operations, are the four Class B standing committees. They are Budget; Rules and Administration; Small Business; and Veterans' Affairs. There are no Class C standing committees.

Special and Select Committees (4)

Select and special committees fall into either the Class B or the Class C category. They are created for clearly specified purposes and, although those that currently exist are now considered permanent, they did not necessarily enjoy that status at their inception. Special investigating committees, such as the 1973 Select Committee to Investigate Presidential Campaign Activities (the Watergate Committee), expire after they submit their final report to the Senate. There is no substantive difference between a select and a special committee. In earlier times, select and special committees lacked authority to report legislation to the full Senate, but some now have this power. There are currently two Class B committees: the Select Committee on Intelligence and the Special Committee on Aging, and two Class C committees: the Committee on Indian Affairs and the Select Committee on Ethics. While members of standing committees are formally designated by Senate resolution, members of select and special committees are officially appointed by the Senate's president or president pro tempore. (See the "Appointment" section below.)
===

Party conference rules provide that each newly elected senator may choose a committee assignment before any other newly elected member is allowed to make a second committee choice. New senators make their selections according to a priority system that gives first choice to those who have previously served in the Senate, then to those with prior House service, and finally to those who served as their state's governor. All other new members have their order of choice determined by random drawing.

-------

Brown had more seniority and then the other two probably just drew ahead of him.  I do think there's also a sort of tendency to encourage people to look at other committees if there's a demand and one Senator is already on the Committee--it also makes sense from the same party since both can do each other favors by being on more committees.  

by archpundit 2006-11-14 12:42PM | 0 recs
Re: I Thought Reid Promised Tester a Spot

You essentially have it--there are exceptions, but not many on high profile committees.

Banking is good for  him--money for reelection

Energy is pretty important for him.

Government Affairs is a good pork spot.

Veterans is great for constituent services.  

Small business is another good constituent service place--especially for a state like Montana.

Indian affairs is good for him too--36,000 American Indians on reservations in Montana--if like other states they vote at about a 90% rate for Dems.  Now, getting turnout up is a problem, but its a good assignment for a Western Dem.  

They took care of him--they may not seem sexy, but they are good committees for a Freshman until an Appropriations spot opens up.  

by archpundit 2006-11-14 12:30PM | 0 recs
Re: I Thought Reid Promised Tester a Spot

IIRC, Reid promised him a spot on appropriations "as soon as possible"

Tester has some good spots.  

I think that they all did pretty well.  Sanders on Energy, EPW, HELP (is that Labor?), Budget, Veterans.  Good places for a rather Green Socialist.

Webb on Armed Services, Foreign Relations, Veterans, and Joint Economic (whats that?)

good stuff.  What's Whitehouse's background?  I probably know the least about him...except that he seems to have been born to live somewhere in Washington :-P

by JJCPA 2006-11-14 05:27PM | 0 recs
Re: I Thought Reid Promised Tester a Spot
Banking can have a huge impact on Agriculture, clearly.  Might have been a runner up choice.  Between the financial institutions subcommittee (farmers borrow a lot of money) and the international trade committee, he can have an impact on Montana's Farmers, Forestry industry, and Mining industry.
Energy gives him power over National Parks and the like.
Government affairs will help him repeal "the damn patriot act"
by JJCPA 2006-11-14 05:48PM | 0 recs
I saw

that Inouye and Akaka were both on Indian Affairs.

by Ugluks Flea 2006-11-14 12:32PM | 0 recs
Re: I saw

Inouye has been on Indian Affairs since the dawn of time, I think. Akaka needs another shot at getting the Native Hawaiian Recognition ("Akaka") bill passed.

by hono lulu 2006-11-14 07:39PM | 0 recs
Re: I Thought Reid Promised Tester a Spot

Lautenberg got a seat, leapfrogging several Dems who outrank his 2002-based seniority.  I'd guess it was also a move to placate him since he was pushing to chair Homeland Security and Government Affairs over Lieberman.  That would've pushed Lieberman over to chair EPW, taking a chairmanship away from Boxer.  OR, it might've spurred Lieberman to caucus with the Rs.  Reid gave up his seat to Lautenberg basically; that's what he did with his EPW post in 2001 to entice Jeffords into switching caucuses.  So the parallel makes me think this was a political/strategic move.

by Sandwich Repairman 2006-11-15 05:33AM | 0 recs
Re: I Thought Reid Promised Tester a Spot

..or they took into account his non-contiguous Senate terms

by KitBinns 2006-11-15 05:54AM | 0 recs
Re: I Thought Reid Promised Tester a Spot

Lautenberg has tried to make that argument, but from what I've read (Roll Call?), that's not what happened.  Otherwise he'd have enough seniority (as much as a senator who'd been elected in 1984) to chair a full committee (e.g. Harkin and Kerry, both elected to the Senate in 1984).

by Sandwich Repairman 2006-11-15 06:48PM | 0 recs
Re: I Thought Reid Promised Tester a Spot on Appro

I agree. Big screwup on the Democratic side if this is true.

by PsiFighter37 2006-11-14 12:04PM | 0 recs
Re: I Thought Reid Promised Tester a Spot on Appro

The promise was as soon as possible--meaning as soon as someone left the committee.  

He'll be on there probably in his second term.  Reid can't bump someone with seniority unless they agree without upsetting the entire system.  He'll be first in line though.  

Energy should be a good starter committee for him.  

by archpundit 2006-11-14 12:23PM | 0 recs
Re: I Thought Reid Promised Tester a Spot on Appro

Energy should be a good starter committee for him.

Agreed. It puts him in a great position to be a "partner" for Gov. Schweitzer's efforts at the federal level. It's nice to think that MT not only now has a great Senator, but a great state-federal team working for its citizens.

by EliWho 2006-11-14 12:27PM | 0 recs
well . . .

. . . there were three members added to Appropriations: Reed, Lautenberg and Nelson (NE).

by Adam B 2006-11-14 01:16PM | 0 recs
No freshmen though.

I wonder if freshmen ever get put on Appropriations.

by texas dem 2006-11-14 01:55PM | 0 recs
Re: No freshmen though.

Probably not.  And my understanding is that Jack Reed had been on Appropriations until 2002 and we lost seats, and Lautenberg, well, may need the help in NJ.

by Adam B 2006-11-14 02:13PM | 0 recs
Re: No freshmen though.

Lautenberg really ought to be on the Aging Committee.  With Byrd as the chairman.

by Steve M 2006-11-14 04:46PM | 0 recs
Re: No freshmen though.

He's not aging.  He's aged already.

by Adam B 2006-11-14 05:57PM | 0 recs
Re: No freshmen though.

No.  Newly elected freshmen do not get seats on Approps or Finance.

by Sandwich Repairman 2006-11-15 05:34AM | 0 recs
Re: I Thought Reid Promised Tester a Spot on Appro

Definitely in his second term...look at the guys on that committee...Byrd, Inouye, Leahy, Kohl.  I'm guessing they aren't gonna be around much longer, and Tester's gonna be around for years to come.

by JJCPA 2006-11-14 05:51PM | 0 recs
Re: I Thought Reid Promised Tester a Spot on Appro

And I actually meant the next Congress--but yeah we agree.  

by archpundit 2006-11-14 10:01PM | 0 recs
Re: I Thought Reid Promised

More to the point, Reid promised the voters of Montana. As has been mentioned in other replies, "as soon as possible," yet let's not forget this was supposed to counter Conrad Burns' senority in the minds of the electorate.

by Josalo 2006-11-14 06:26PM | 0 recs
Re: Senate Committee Assignments

Wasn't Tester promised a seat on Appropriations by Reid. That would be bad promise to break unless they plan on doing the switch 2 years before Tester's reelection.

by gomer 2006-11-14 11:42AM | 0 recs
Re: Senate Committee Assignments

That HELP (health education labor and pensions) committee looks like fun to me. Kennedy as chair, with Clinton and Obama both running for president and Brown and Sanders as perhaps the most worker focused of the new senators. I could see a real health care plan or significant pension reform coming out of there, if the national winds blow the right way.

by jujube 2006-11-14 11:48AM | 0 recs
Maybe Bernie Sanders should ask for seniority too

Hell, if LIeberman is going to retain his seniority on a committee which reflects the worst of his blunders, maybe Sanders could threaten his support for the caucus and make it a free for all. Probably makes the establishemtn think twice before making such promises.

by Pravin 2006-11-14 11:50AM | 0 recs
House Gov Affairs

Will have to shame Lieberman into investigating stuff, by finding all kinds of dirt and making him look like the administration and Iraq apologist he is.

by scientician 2006-11-14 11:52AM | 0 recs
Re: House Gov Affairs

Who holds the power to investigate and potentially supeona gov't officals?

by MrMacMan 2006-11-14 12:05PM | 0 recs
Wouldn't have to

be Sanders. Any single Democratic senator has as much leverage as he does, and the only thing keeping them from issuing demands is integrity.

If Jim Webb said, tomorrow, that either he was gonna chair Judiciary or he'd bolt to the Republicans, what would we do?

by BingoL 2006-11-14 02:59PM | 0 recs
Re: Wouldn't have to

That's hardly comparable to Lieberman simply retaining his existing seniority.

by Steve M 2006-11-14 04:43PM | 0 recs
Re: Senate Committee Assignments

When do we hear about the republican choices for committees and for leadership positions?

by JamesMA01 2006-11-14 11:53AM | 0 recs
Tester's not on the AG commitee?

Isn't he, like, the ONLY farmer in the Senate?

by Hesiod Theogeny 2006-11-14 12:03PM | 0 recs
Re: Tester's not on the AG commitee?

sounds pretty stupid to me.

Lets hope this isn't decided already...

It says anticipated... but I really -- Tester... why not?

by MrMacMan 2006-11-14 12:06PM | 0 recs
Presumably they'll rotate him in when

Baucus retires?

Weird to me too.  He's a frickin farmer, guys!

by texas dem 2006-11-14 01:57PM | 0 recs
Re: Tester's not on the AG commitee?

He's on small business and energy, they both have ties with Ag. IIRC, Tester campaigned saying one of the biggest issues facing farmers is energy. Also, as farm-communities look to diversify income, small business comes into play.

Don't worry, he'll be able to do plenty good with these assignments.

by SLJ 2006-11-14 03:00PM | 0 recs
Re: Tester's not on the AG commitee?

No.  Chuck Grassley.  And Richard Lugar also has a family farm, but he's not actively involved in running it.

by gjdodger 2006-11-15 07:03AM | 0 recs
Re: Senate Committee Assignments

Having two senators from the same party on a committee is unusual at best.  It's pure overrepresentation at worst.

Committee assignments will change again in two years, and if Democrats pick up a number of GOP seats we have more freshmen, and more committee seats.

Reid promised Tester a spot on Appropriations "as soon as possible."  Recognize that much of the committee placement is based on seniority, and the way seniority is determined when everyone is elected on the same night depends on when the polls close in a particular state.

Therefore, if polls close at 7pm EST in Ohio, and 8pm EST in Missouri, then the senator from Ohio technically has more seniority because voters are still casting ballots in Missouri when the Ohio polls are closed.  Therefore the race isn't yet decided.

BTW, freshmen never get appropriations.  Lautenburg and Nelson (NE) are the two most junior members.  Frank will be retring so that makes on Dem opening; Byrd and Inoye are ancient and anything can happen to them in the next few years; Leahy is happy at Judiciary.

by MyDD Fan 2006-11-14 12:17PM | 0 recs
Re: Senate Committee Assignments

It sounds completely bizarre to make one member senior to another member from the same class based upon something that arbitrary.  Do you have a link for that?

by Steve M 2006-11-14 04:44PM | 0 recs
Re: Senate Committee Assignments

Yeah!  And do they adjust for time zones?

by CranesAreFlying 2006-11-14 05:30PM | 0 recs
Re: Senate Committee Assignments

There are detailed rules for determining seniority.  Time zone has nothing to do with it.  There's a hierarchy that counts length of service in the US House and previous service in various other offices.  At bottom, if a new senator has no service in any office in the seniority hierarchy, they get ranked at the bottom along with others in that category (this applied to Corzine, Clinton, and Dayton in 2001).  Within that category, seniority is given by state population.  Cardin, Sanders, and Brown get credited (in that order) for their House seniority.  Casey, McCaskill, and Whitehouse will get some credit for their state offices.  Klobuchar may or may not get credit for having been a county prosecutor.  Tester should get some credit for his service in the MT legislature.  But if those last two are in the same category, Klobuchar has more seniority because MN has more people than MT.

by Sandwich Repairman 2006-11-15 05:39AM | 0 recs
Re: Senate Committee Assignments

Thanks for the clarification. Is there a FAQ somewhere for us rubes trying to keep up with the House minutiae?

by CranesAreFlying 2006-11-15 04:46PM | 0 recs
Re: Senate Committee Assignments

No problem.  I know much less about the House though; my time on the Hill was all in the upper chamber, and I'm a bit of a Senate elitist.  ;)

These rules are set by each caucus though, not by the Senate or House as a whole.  That also means they can be changed more easily.  So I don't think the rules would be on an official House or Senate site.  I'm not sure if they're out there in free documents, and I honestly don't even remember where I learned this.  Probably some of the subscription publications like CQ, Roll Call or National Journal explain it.  Another possibility would be the Congressional Research Service (CRS), Congress' own private branch of the Library of Congress.  Their stuff is only distributed through members of Congress (i.e. you'd have to ask for it from one of your members of Congress), but there's a website devoted to posting as many of CRS' great reports as possible: http://www.opencrs.com.

CRS is little known, but excellent and unbiased.  CRS employees are extraordinarily knowledgeable; their hiring is very competitive.  There's no good reason for them not to release their work directly to the public (esp. since that's who pays for it), and changing the rules so they can or have to do so is a cause a few people have been fighting for years.

Your signature reminds me that I think France has nailed the four food groups: bread, wine, cheese, and chocolate.  :)

by Sandwich Repairman 2006-11-16 09:08AM | 0 recs
Environment and Public Works

Can I just say holy shit? What a wonderful turnaround from the Inhofe-era dark ages!

Environment Public Works
CHAIR:  Boxer
Baucus
Lieberman
Carper
Clinton
Lautenberg
Cardin
Sanders
Klobuchar
Whitehouse

hows Klobuchar on the environment?

by faithfull 2006-11-14 12:57PM | 0 recs
Re: Environment and Public Works

Klobuchar is fantastic. Has shown a committment to fight global warming in her speeches, also recognizes the need to save our public lands.

Sanders, Cardin, and Whitehouse are phenomenal additions as well.

by mwilli 2006-11-14 01:42PM | 0 recs
Webb

Great use of Webb, btw. Put him on all foreign policy, military committees. It gives Democrats even more legitimacy when sounding off against Iraq.

by mwilli 2006-11-14 01:44PM | 0 recs
Re: Webb

I wanted to see him on Intelligence, rather than Foreign Relations.

The only freshmen they put on Intelligence is the highly reliable upper-class Democratic establishment Whitehouse.  Great for him, but I'd rather see Webb in there.  He knows shit when he smells it, and he's not afraid to ask questions that make people nervous.

On the other hand, Foreign Relations probably has pretty wide jurisdiction over war-fightin, so that may be a fair trade.

by texas dem 2006-11-14 02:00PM | 0 recs
Re: Senate Committee Assignments

If Democrats increse their number of seats, as expected, after 2008, then there will be additional space on the appropriations comittee for him.  As others have noted, a Lautenberg retirement would also open up a slot.

It is alright for, perhaps, two senators of the same state to be on a committee like the Judiciary because Judiciary policy is usually not state-specific.  It's more ideological.  Agriculture, however, has major ramifications for the regional bias in the distribution of pork & agricultural policymaking.

by sean023 2006-11-14 02:21PM | 0 recs
Re: Senate Committee Assignments

Can someone explain how seniority works? Is a freshman in the majority more senior than a freshman in the minority? What about two senators elected at the same time in the same party? How do they decide who's most senior? Is it the size of the state or something weird like that? Or do they draw for it?

by Gpack3 2006-11-14 03:47PM | 0 recs
Re: Senate Committee Assignments

On committees, I believe it's based on who has served on the committee longer.

by Tom 2006-11-14 04:25PM | 0 recs
Re: Senate Committee Assignments

I meant in general. Obama made some joke when he first took office about the big hullabaloo for someone 99th in seniority. I don't know how that aspect is determinted. I guessed that he was behind all the Republicans elected at the same time (Isakson, Burr, Coburn, etc.) and I wondered how he was ahead of Salazar. Would that flip now that he's in the majority?

by Gpack3 2006-11-14 05:11PM | 0 recs
Re: Senate Committee Assignments

Seniority in the Senate overall is based on when the dates they are sworn in - not as someone above said it was the polls closing.  So unless a Senator is filling a vacancy all of the senators elected in the same year have the same seniority.  On the committee level it is based on the years that they were on that committee.  I believe a tie breaker would be overall seniority.  However, it is not really important when you get down to the least 'seniors' - remember you can only chair one committee so the next senior person becomes the chair.  The seniorty generally follows to the subcommittes as well - but given the size difference this is more important on the house side where sub committee chair can wield great influence.  

hope that helps.  

by mikelw 2006-11-14 04:52PM | 0 recs
Re: Senate Committee Assignments

Inouye as chair of Commerce should bode well for net neutrality. I think he proposed the net neutrality amendment.

Akaka on Energy should be interested. He promised during the campaign to revisit his ANWR stance.

by hono lulu 2006-11-14 07:44PM | 0 recs
Re: Senate Committee Assignments

Where's this info coming from, by the way?

by bluenc 2006-11-14 11:17PM | 0 recs
Re: Senate Committee Assignments

This setup does a great job for net neutrality but if we want a manhattan project for new energy sources we'd better be careful. some of these look a bit odd.

for example lieberman on environment and public works comitee - that to me looks like the fox guarding the henhouse.

also lieberman on small business? don't get it. someone who supports the bush administration is for big business, not small business.

by heyAnita 2006-11-15 03:10AM | 0 recs
Tester on Banking?

The full name of the committee:

The U.S. Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs

What on earth is Tester doing on this committee? Is there any way to make his service here productive for the people of Montana?

by EliWho 2006-11-15 04:11AM | 0 recs
Re: Senate Committee Assignments

I'm also wondering the source of this list?

by Sandwich Repairman 2006-11-15 05:42AM | 0 recs

Diaries

Advertise Blogads