Bipartisanship seems to have given way to partisan warfare in the US House of Representatives- and so far, the leadership has been mute in response to recent acting out by its members.
The latest round of incidents began last Thursday in the Rayburn House Office Building when the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Democrats met secretly after telling Republican members that the session had been cancelled due to a scheduling conflict. This move was in response to Democrats’ displeasure over the Republicans’ plan to subpoena Bank of America for information related to the “Friends of Angelo” VIP mortgage program that a number of prominent Democrats benefited from. When the Republicans discovered that they had been deceived, they made a video of the Democrats exiting their back room meeting and posted it on both their committee website, and on YouTube. Not to be outdone, panel Democrats retaliated by changing the lock on the door that connects the GOP’s office space to the main hearing room, citing the reason that Republicans “don’t know how to behave.” What’s next; the slashing of tires, egging of cars, or perhaps trashing of offices? It’s all somewhat reminiscent of life on fraternity row.
The US House of Representatives has a long and colorful history of infighting and one-upmanship. However, recent events suggest a change in the rules regarding what is considered appropriate behavior for our nation’s policy makers. In the past, when members have stepped over the line of what is considered acceptable decorum- members in leadership positions of one or both parties such as the Speaker of the House, The Majority leader, The Majority Whip, the Minority leader, and/or the Minority Whip, have acted swiftly to discipline, censor, disclaim, publicly disavow themselves from said behavior and/or request or make a formal apology to the offended members or party. So where has the House leadership been while all of this has been going on?
The silence on the part of senior members can have several possible interpretations. They may be staying mute because they support the behavior of their party members and believe it to be justified. Perhaps they have not wanted to draw attention to these incidents for fear of backlash from their constituencies, who would frown upon these childish antics and remember them at election time. They may be working behind the scenes, quietly attempting to broker a peace that will help them move forward with the business of the country- or perhaps there has been a breakdown of hierarchy and/or respect for authority that has resulted in a kind of free for all among the membership.
Whatever the reason for their silence- it is bound to have a negative impact on their image, and on their ability to perform their duties and effectively represent their constituents’ needs. That’s our tax dollars at work, folks!
Comments