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

TABOR & Proposition CC: Providing Context to Colorado's Tax Problem

Edward Baisley Prof. Matthew Hitt POLS 304 Dec. 2019 Blog Post 3 (TABOR and Proposition CC) Colorado's tax system is very unique in comparison to pretty much every other state in the U.S. Arguably the biggest aspect of the tax system that is unique is the amendment to the Colorado Constitution known as TABOR or the Tax Payers Bill of Rights. This amendment which was drafted into law in 1992, has many implications for Colorado's state and local governments. One of the main implications is that TABOR requires the state and local governments of Colorado to acquire voter approval before any tax increase can be implemented. Some other more less known implications are detailed by Denver Post author Anna Staver, she explains that TABOR: “ Limits how many tax dollars governments can keep … It’s called the TABOR cap, anything a government collects above the cap gets returned as a TABOR tax refund … (TABOR) Limits when lawmakers can ask voters to raise taxe...
1 comment
Read more

The Flawed American Electoral System

A free and fair election is one that is inclusive to all of the population. A democratic state requires active citizen participation to ensure equal representation. The framers of the constitution originally wanted the United States government to only be governed by educated white men. It was not until 1920 that the 19th amendment was passed that allowed white females to vote in America. Then it was not until the Voting Rights Act of 1965 that allowed African-Americans the right to vote freely. There were many amendments and reforms throughout history that has changed our election system. Different changes to state election process will ensure an equitable election system. This is a highly debated legislative issue that goes back and forth for the past decade and into the 2020 election. It is crucial for such a powerful and free country to protect its proud democratic values.  There are still issues with the American election systems. There are a lot of holes in represe...
1 comment
Read more

The Ballot Initiative in Colorado

    One of the most distinctive features of the legislative process in Colorado is the prevalence of the ballot initiative. In the election this November, voters had the opportunity to approve their own laws. One of these laws included a proposition that would legalize sports betting.     This is not the first time that voters have had the ability to make hugely influential decisions. Voters have voted to legalize marijuana. In Colorado, they even approve tax increases because of the Taxpayer's Bill of Rights, or TABOR. This means that, unlike in other states, Colorado voters have legislative power of their own.      One of these most recent initiatives involved sports betting. Colorado would legalize sports betting, but sports betting would be taxed. This revenue would be used to fund plans to address Colorado's water problem. However, according to the Colorado Sun, the money from sports betting will not generate any money to address these water iss...
Post a Comment
Read more