An Internet hub with domestic and international news, analysis, original reporting, and popular features from the left, center, indies, centrists, moderates, and right
Reyes to chair Intelligence panel
Reyes to chair Intelligence panel
House Speaker-to-be Nancy Pelosi has chosen a Border-Patrol-agent-turned-congressman to lead the House Intelligence Committee.
I think this is a great resolution to a delicate issue. Do you?
13 Responses to “Reyes to chair Intelligence panel”
I predicted it weeks ago, offering even money on Reyes. I think it speaks quite well of Pelosi, and I am NOT a Pelosi fan. A smart move, and a good pick for the job.
Tully,
What predictions are your making on other conroversial issues?
Depends on the issue, of course! But Reyes was the obvious choice, dodging the Hastings baggage while still allowing Pelosi to skip doing anything nice for Harman. And he’s well-qaulified.
One thing I would offer is that cross-aisle deals on the estate tax and AMT will probably be forthcoming next session.
From your lips to Gods ears
What about major tax system reform?
SS?
Energy?
It is certainly better than staying with Hastings, which would have seriously undermined Pelosi’s “new broom sweeps clean” image. However, it is not likely to endear her to some among the feminist contingent, who see her treatment of Jane Harman as a case of “Women NOT Helping Women”.
~EdT.
Rush Holt (D-NJ-12) was the best choice, but he never had a chance because he just didn’t satisfy the politics. Too bad. It’s an important job and Holt’s qualifications are extraordinary.
I don’t know much about him but on the surface it seems like a good choice, and I give credit where credit is due to Pelosi. Personally I don’t think she should have passed over Harman but it is her prerogative to do so, and at least she seems to have chosen a decent alternative.
I don’t expect any major systematic tax reform (such as closing loopholes to re-broaden the tax base, or code simplification) but I’d love to be wrong. And I don’t expect any useful SS or energy-policy reform, just demogoguery and window-dressing that might be worse than doing nothing. Once again, I’d love to be wrong.
I’d be real surprised not to see the AMT and estate tax compromises, though. Both taxes have crept down through lack of indexing to where someone with a decent house in Berkeley and an adequate retirement fund could be slammed by one, and anyone with a really good job in any major metro could be hit by the other, both without feeling remotely “rich,” so the pressure to move the goalposts will be huge. The “unrealized capital gains” argument for having an estate tax is a good one. I’d look for a $3 to $5 mill inflation-indexed exemption and a rate hooked to the K gains tax rate.
About Harmen, wasn’t there a term limit in effect regarding her in the first place?
Harman had left Congress to run for California Governor. She lost and won her seat back. So there was a sort of break in her tenure.
Harman could have been reappointed – indeed longer terms on this committee was one recommendation of the 9/11 Commission.
It was a smart move. It shows Pelosi is aware of the ramifications of naming Hastings, and didn’t cave to the black caucus. I don’t see why she should have named Jane Harman -if they have fundamental policy disagreements they would have had a lot of friction working together. I’ve read that the chair for this committee is not passed on by seniority, because it is such a sensitive position. Anyway, I’m relieved to see she made the right choice. Was Denny Hastert ever under the microscope this way? If so, I don’t remember ever hearing much about him until the Foley mess.
There are no real “rules” about tenure or seniority for committee chairmanships, only party custom. It was entirely Pelosi’s call to name whom she wanted. Harman could have been re-appointed, but Harman and Pelosi have some major bad blood going on. Harman also has some potentially major ethics problems right now.
There IS a House term limit rule as Capelza mentions, but it can be waived out-of-hand by the Speaker and in any event doesn’t apply to either the committee chair or ranking member. (This makes David Obey very happy….)