Here’s a poll I’d like to see.
Would you prefer a Congressperson that is a career politician or one that has never held elective office?
The answer to that question probably changes a lot from election cycle to election cycle. In the aftermath of 9/11, for example, people were probably more inclined to go for experience over an unknown quantity. But, this is not so in every election cycle. In 1994, for example, the country elected 37 Republican congresspeople that had never previously held elective office. The people just wanted to kick the bums out. As Nathan Gonzales points out, 2006 might be that kind of year.
Perhaps the starkest contrast in credentials can be seen in three GOP open seats in the Midwest — in Minnesota’s 6th, Illinois’ 6th and Wisconsin’s 8th, where the three GOP nominees, Michele Bachmann, Peter Roskam and John Gard, are state legislators, while the Democrats in the three contests, Patty Wetterling, Tammy Duckworth and Steve Kagen, never have held elective office.
But that’s just the tip of the iceberg. In California’s 4th, Charlie Brown (D) is a 26-year veteran of the Air Force who served on the professional staff of the Roseville Police Department. His “elective” experience, according to his Web site, is limited to service chairing the “Supervisory Committee” of a credit union.
In California’s 11th district, Democrat Jerry McNerney has been an engineer and energy consultant and is now CEO of a start-up company that manufactures wind turbines. In Washington’s 8th district, Democratic nominee Darcy Burner was a former manager at Microsoft.
Heath Shuler (D) in North Carolina’s 11th is a former football player and a real estate agent. Democrat Joe Donnelly, in Indiana’s 2nd district, is an attorney and businessman who lost bids for the state Senate and for Congress; he never has held elective office. The same goes for businessman Jack Davis, the Democrat who’s taking on GOP Rep. Tom Reynolds in New York’s 26th district.
And I’m not done yet. Democrats Ellen Simon (Arizona’s 1st), Charlie Stuart (Florida’s 8th), Christine Jennings (Florida’s 13th), Tim Walz (Minnesota’s 1st), Victoria Wulsin (Ohio’s 2nd), Lois Murphy (Pennsylvania’s 6th), Joe Sestak (Pennsylvania’s 7th), Patrick Murphy (Pennsylvania’s 8th) and Chris Carney (Pennsylvania’s 10th) also never have held elective office. There are others, but you get the drift.
The Dems have recruited a mix of schoolteachers, war and intelligence veterans, small businesspeople, upper management types, minor celebrities, and (naturally) attorneys, rather than just looking to hottest assemblyman or woman. The results should be interesting.
Even for a veteran politician, it must be somewhat bewildering to come to Washington DC and enter into Congress. But for someone that has never sat in a legislative body? It must be overwhelming. Each of these newly elected neophytes will be looking for mentors to show them everything from how the rules work to where the gym and cafeteria are to where to rent or buy lodging.
And that is where the dynamic of the House power structure comes into play. War and intelligence veterans like Patrick Murphy (PA-08), Chris Carney (PA-10), and Joe Sestak (PA-07) will probably gravitate towards John Murtha (PA-12) as he challenges Steny Hoyer for majority whip. Meanwhile, progressives like Jerry McNerney (CA-11) and Patty Wetterling (MN-06) will probably rally around the speaker. Other loci of power revolve around the committee chairs. Where will all these newbies get assigned and how will that effect their job development? If your mentor is Charlie Rangel, John Conyers, Henry Waxman, or George Miller you are going to have a different outlook and experience than if your mentor is Ike Skelton, John Spratt, or Collin Peterson.
There is one other avenue for shaping the next Congress, and that is solidarity among the freshmen themselves. This happened in 1974 and again, especially, in 1994. In both of those historical precedents, the freshmen class was significantly more radical than the rest of their caucus and much more reform-minded. I don’t see this incoming class of Democrats are particularly radical on the policy front. But they are significantly more confrontational and aggressive on the style-front. They are the children of Bushism, and they are not shy about waging war on Bush’s style of governance. They are shrill, acerbic, and vituperative.
A lot will depend on how well we do in the border states and the mountain west. A lot depends on whether we can take the Senate as well. As long as the Republicans hold the Senate they will be able to use it to endanger a lot of Democrats that won narrowly in traditionally Republican seats. But, without the Senate, the Dems can control the Congressional agenda and avoid troublesome votes.
It should be interesting. I have to say that I like the idea of a Congress with a lot of non-politicians in it. They’ll make mistakes, but they’ll also be more candid and more independent. That would be refreshing.
