Democrats quietly toss term limits on congressional chairs

[sabra]

Source: LA Times/MSNBC First Read

With so much Capitol Hill attention focused on swearing-in members and not swearing-in Roland Burris, the congressional majority Democrats released a package of rules changes tNew York congressman Charlie Rangelhis week.

It has the very optimistic title: "Common-Sense Reforms to Keep Congress Working for America."

That kind of verbiage -- like "Have I got a deal for you!" -- should set off all kinds of alarms.

And it did for the folks over at MSNBC's savvy First Read, who point out that one of the silent changes throws away term limits for congressional committee chairs, all of whom at the moment just happen to be, of course, Democrats.

The MSNBC crew points out that of the 22 committee chairs, 16 have been in office since long before Bill Clinton left Arkansas. The changes mean that a chairman like, oh, say, Charlie Rangel of New York (see photo) can hold the gavel for as long as he wants.

Read more: http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2009/01/democrats-congr.html

---

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2009/01/06/1733496.aspx

[WriteDown]

1. So Charlie Rangel....

Is going nowhere? Meet the new boss, same as the old. Literally.

[baldguy]

2. Why fix what ain't broke?

We've wone the last 5 Presidential elections and gained seats in Congress in 6 of the last 10 election cycles.

[WriteDown]

3. Eternal power is always a bad thing.....

And Rangel is a bad apple.

[trotsky]

4. Mainly due to incomptence and corruption of Republicans.

I dunno, I think it would be healthy for the country and our party to mix things up once in a while. Committee chairs wield a surprising amount of power in advancing/obstructing legislation.

[derby378]

10. Rangel's been known to play dirty in the House

We do need to clean our own mess. Seriously.

[jwirr]

5. I am not sure this is a good idea. We may get rid of a few bad apples

but what about the good apples that go with them? I am thinking of the Lion of the Senate Edward Kennedy and many others who we respect. Well it is done - we will see.

[Libertas1776]

6. ...

Why do some people think that just because they are Democrats that they can't be corrupted. Hello...Charlie Rangel is one corrupt s.o.b.
Just like the Repubs, these new and old farts will continue to tote the company line. The new fuckers are just as bad as the old fuckers.

[AngryAmish]

7. This is change we can believe in!

[Poll_Blind]

8. I don't care if the Democrats DO benefit from it, this dynastic bullshit is...

...WRONG

  It doesn't promote anything beyond individuals entrenching themselves in posts where they can be corrupted more easily.

PB

[yurbud]

9. I'm not a fan of term limits in any case--revolving doors benefit entrenched business interests

[bemildred]

11. We need new blood, not business as usual. nt

[struggle4progress]

12. Well, we tried 'em for a dozen years, & they didn't reduce Republican corruption at all

I'd bet they didn't affect much of anything -- though for a couple of years, I guess they provided the Republicans with yet another non-substantial jabbering point