Skip to main content

House Party Majority and Impeachment

Having a party majority in the House of Representatives provides the majority party with an arsenal of powerful political tools that can help the majority party members achieve goals on behalf of their party and their constituents.  The most notable perk of holding the House majority is having the ability to elect a member of your party to the position of Speaker of the House of Representatives. Because the Speaker of the House is the presiding member of the body, they are able to use their powers as Speaker to forward the agenda of their party. However, the Speaker of the House also has a strong responsibility to keep their party in power in the House. Part of the reasoning behind this is that the Speaker of the House won't get to keep their position and the power that comes with it if their party doesn't keep the majority. This is explained in Matthew Green's article "Evaluating the Pelosi Speakership" which stated that: "Speakers are party loyalists first and foremost, and they can’t keep the job if their party loses power".  The Speaker of the House also has a responsibility to help their party stay in power because they are much more visible to the public than their fellow House members.

A strong example of this can be seen through Nancy Pelosi's Speakership and her attitude and actions towards the impeachment proceedings of Donald Trump.  Speaker of the House Pelosi has used her position in her party and in the house to caution her party against prematurely rushing into impeachment proceedings. She urged her party to wait until they had more reasons and evidence for pursuing impeachment before they formally opened the process. Speaker Pelosi's reasoning for waiting on impeachment was to protect the members of her party who had more vulnerable seats in the house from losing their seats in the next election due to backlash from members of their district that opposed opening impeachment proceedings. The house members from the democratic party that are pushing the hardest for impeachment tend to be from strongly democratic districts that practically ensure the safety of their seat, allowing them to seek impeachment without much fear for their seat. However, many democratic house members have less secure seats and have followed Speaker of the House Pelosi's advice regarding impeachment proceedings in order to protect their seats and their majority. The graph below made by Sarah Binder demonstrates the relation between how democratic a house member's district is and how committed they are to impeachment proceedings.

Democratic members of the House from safer districts are more likely to favor impeachment. (Sarah Binder)


As shown in the graph there is a strong correlation between how democratic and how securely democratic a district is and how committed the house member elected by that district is to the impeachment proceedings. Nancy Pelosi counseling all of her party against aggressively seeking impeachment until there was more public support for it was intended to protect the seats of the party as a whole.  While the majority party can direct agenda, especially with the strong majority the Democrats have in the house, outnumbering the Republicans over 2 to 1, there can be good reasons for the majority party to refrain from taking aggressive actions (Party Breakdown).  In the case of impeachment, it is prudent for all or most of the democratic members of the house to wait for more of the public to support impeachment proceedings before the house members formally commit to impeachment proceedings. The actions of a party member or several party members deviating from the consensus of the main party can damage the "party brand" and further weaken the party's hold on already vulnerable seats. Despite the value of party unification in the case discussed here it can be difficult for the Speaker of the House to unify the entirety of their party on issues, especially now as "a growing number of lawmakers are less attached to traditional notions of what a party in congress means" and in following party mandates to the letter (Adler, et al. 233). The speaker of the house can attempt to obstruct or impede party members that do not act with the party by publicly censuring them or refusing to support them but their options can be limited despite the power held by the Speaker of the House.



Adler, E. Scott, et al. The United States Congress. W.W. Norton & Company, 2019.
Binder, Sarah. “Analysis | Here's Why Pelosi Won't Allow the House to Pursue Impeachment - at Least Not Yet.” The Washington Post, WP Company, 15 June 2019, https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/06/15/heres-why-pelosi-wont-allow-house-pursue-impeachment-least-not-yet/.
“Column: Why Democrats Shouldn't Impeach Trump - Yet.” Los Angeles Times, Los Angeles Times, 24 Apr. 2019, https://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-pol-democrats-impeachment-trump-20190424-story.html.
“Evaluating the Pelosi Speakership.” Mischiefs of Faction, https://www.mischiefsoffaction.com/post/evaluating-pelosi-speakership.
“Party Breakdown.” House Press Gallery, US House of Representatives, 1 Oct. 2019, https://pressgallery.house.gov/member-data/party-breakdown.

Comments

  1. KaitlynAndersonOctober 22, 2019 at 12:12 PM

    This post was very interesting and very well written. The Speaker is arguably one of the more powerful positions in government. What Pelosi is doing by putting off an impeachment vote to protect her majority is very smart. I did not know that that is why she was refusing to take an impeachment vote, but that is very interesting.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Mary LeonardOctober 22, 2019 at 12:46 PM


    Great job! I think that there is often a misconception of the Speaker’s priorities. Many don’t realize that their priority is not specifically to keep their job, but instead to keep their party in the majority so that they can indirectly keep it, as you mentioned. Speaker Pelosi was harshly criticized for postponing impeachment trials, but it seems to be that she didn’t do it for personal reasons, but instead to help out her party, as you mentioned. I like that you were able to find a graph that showed the correlation between strength of seats and commitment to impeachment. It is interesting to see the wide-ranging opinions of the Democratic party on the matter, especially because the media has a tendency to make it seem like they all are mostly in agreement.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Two-Party System: Possible Impacts on Polarization & Congressional Policy Making

Edward Baisley Prof. Matthew Hitt POLS 304 16 Oct. 2019 Blog Post 2 (Two Party System)             The two-party system in the United States of America has been an integral part of our political culture since the country’s inception in the 1700’s. Since then, our country has accepted this system as an inevitable part of how our nation’s leaders are chosen, nominated, and elected into office. Now days, when it comes to our contemporary national congress, both parties have spent an incredible amount of money and resources in an attempt to seize majority control in both the House and the Senate. This attempt to seize majority power in our legislative branch has led to a situation of heated competition. In fact, in recent history, we as citizens of this nation have seen our national Legislator become a partisan battle ground in which both parties and their members are seemingly polarized to an extent that the ...
2 comments
Read more

TABOR and Colorado Politics Post-CC

       One of the more contentious topics within Colorado politics is budgeting and funding for projects, education, and revenue intake. This came to a head in this year's election with Proposition CC. Despite failing at the ballot box, the Democratic Party is pushing ahead with the 2020 legislative agenda that includes drafts to eliminate the Tax Payer's Bill of Rights or amend it to ensure more accessible revenue for the party's policy objectives. What is critical to the debate is the increasing partisan divide within Colorado, the historical shift from Republican control to Democrat trifectas in state government, and the institutional mechanisms that have hampered strategy for the dominant party. Also, in the mix are interest groups that influence local politics which can help uncover party strategy from another perspective.        The Colorado Fiscal Institute (CFI) a left-leaning think tank, is a key player in this battle, authoring s everal...
6 comments
Read more

Insulin cap in Colorado

In the United States, the topic of medication prices has increased substantially, specifically insulin. Insulin is a medication used to treat type one Diabetes which typically costs a thousand dollars or more depending on how much you need, and how much your insurance is willing to pay. Colorado changed this with a bill designed to put a cap on the copay for insulin. The bill HB19-1216 was signed into law by Governor Jared Polis in May of 2019. This bill states that “a carrier that provides coverage for prescription insulin drugs pursuant to the terms of a health coverage plan the carrier offers shall cap the total amount that a covered person is required to pay for a covered prescription insulin drug at an amount not to exceed one hundred dollars per thirty-day supply of insulin, regardless of the amount of type of insulin needed to fill the covered person’s prescription.” This bill will go into effect on January 1st, 2020 and will be overseen by the department of law who will investi...
7 comments
Read more