When it comes to assigning committee chairs in the House of Representatives, the Democrats have long adhered to a rather strict seniority system. Whoever has served longest on the committee gets the chair, unless they have some significant political liabilities. Every once in a while, a member may be passed over because they are the subject of an ethics investigation, or sometimes because of advanced age. But the Democrats don’t place ideological litmus tests on their committee chairmen. They do not skip people over in the name of diversity.
For a very long time, this seniority policy meant that minorities had little hope of becoming the chairman of a full committee. There were simply too many white members ahead of them, and there was almost no way to jump past them. There was grumbling in the Black and Hispanic Caucuses, but they went along with the system.
And then a funny thing happened late in the last decade. A host of black lawmakers and a couple of Latino ones finally outlasted all their white colleagues. John Conyers became chair of the Judiciary Committee after serving 33 years. Charlie Rangel became chair of Ways & Means Committee after serving for 27 years. Bennie Thompson took over Homeland Security. Suddenly, people of color had reached the committee promised land. And then, suddenly, people began talking about moving away from a strict seniority system. It wasn’t right.
Rangel lost his chairmanship because of some ethics issues, and then the Democrats lost control of the House. Yet, the same seniority system applies to ranking members in the minority.
The newest flareup is erupting in anticipation of Ed Markey winning the special Senate election in Massachusetts next month. That would open up the ranking member position on the Natural Resources panel. Rep. Pete DeFazio of Oregon has the seniority to win the seat and Raúl Grijalva ranks seventh. Nonetheless, Rep. Grijalva plans on challenging DeFazio. He claims as part of his rationale that he would add diversity to Democrats’ leadership. That’s the same argument that racial minorities made for years, and it has always had some merit. But scrapping seniority now, when minorities are finally benefitting from the system, would threaten their hard-won gains.
Based on the seniority system, any Democrat currently serving as ranking member stands to become the chairman if the Democrats retake control of the House.
Here’s a list of the minority ranking members whose chairs would be threatened if the Dems move away from the seniority system:
Ethics- Linda Sánchez (D-CA)
Financial Services- Maxine Waters (D-CA)
Homeland Security- Bennie Thompson (D-MS)
Judiciary- John Conyers (D-MI)
Oversight & Government Reform- Elijah Cummings (D-MD)
Science, Space, and Technology- Eddie Bernice Johnson (D-TX)
Small Business- Nydia Velazquez (D-NY)
There is a much longer list if we begin to consider subcommittee chairs, many of which are very important. However, those posts have never been as rigidly assigned as full committee chairs.
In short, Raúl Grijalva doesn’t have a very good argument. Scrapping the seniority system now would not promote diversity. Because the safest and bluest seats in the country are mainly held by minorities, they can expect to rise steadily in seniority as the less safe lawmakers are winnowed out. Moreover, a lot of minorities are already poised to take gavels, including some of the most powerful ones.
That leaves Grijalva to argue that he is more loyal than DeFazio, which is probably narrowly true. He can also argue that he better represents the party’s views on natural resources and the environment, but that is arguable. DeFazio is pretty solid on those issues.
It’s fair to have a debate about the merits of the seniority system. It’s not the only system. It’s not necessarily the best system. For a long time it suppressed diversity; now it promotes it without even trying to promote it.
But there should be a compelling reason for changing the rules in the middle of the game. And the diversity argument utterly fails.
