House Committee Assignments
By Greg L | 11 January 2008 | Virginia House | 5 Comments
The House of Delegates posted it’s committee assignments on the 9th, and for those who follow such things, there are some interesting promotions in the list. Not reflected here is Delegate Marshall’s resignation of a chairmanship in protest of an incomprehensibly dumb rule that would limit each member to a maximum of ten bills in the next session. Here’s the list as it was initially published, which doesn’t include subcommittee memberships. Local (Prince William) delegates are in bold.
PRIVILEGES AND ELECTIONS
Cole (Chairman), Putney, Ingram, Hargrove, Jones of Suffolk, Albo, Cosgrove (Vice Chairman), Frederick, Fralin, O’Bannon, Bell, Miller of Manassas, Suit, Phillips, Scott of Fairfax, Brink, Alexander, Joannou, Sickles, Dance, Englin, MorrisseyCOURTS OF JUSTICE
Albo (Chairman), Griffith, Kilgore, Athey (Vice Chairman), Janis, Bell, Cline, Fralin, Iaquinto, Gilbert, Peace, Miller of Manassas, Loupassi, Johnson, Melvin, Armstrong, Moran, Barlow, Watts, Toscano, Marsden, ValentineEDUCATION
Tata (Chairman), Hamilton, Landes (Vice Chairman), Lingamfelter, Rust, Fralin, Cole, Gilbert, Janis, Athey, Pogge, Massie, Loupassi, Shuler, Alexander, Ebbin, Ware of Roanoke City, Shannon, McClellan, Tyler, Bulova, MorrisseyGENERAL LAWS
Suit (Chairman), Albo, Jones of Suffolk (Vice Chairman), Wright, Oder, Gear, Cosgrove, Carrico, Scott of Madison, Iaquinto, Gilbert, Miller of Manassas, Abbitt, Phillips, Barlow, Hull, Ward, Dance, Tyler, Bulova, Eisenberg, BowlingTRANSPORTATION
May (Chairman), Saxman, Carrico, Cosgrove, Gear, Oder (Vice Chairman), Rust, Hugo, Scott of Madison, Fralin, Tata, Frederick, Loupassi, Jones of Richmond City, Ward, Ebbin, BaCote, Marsden, Valentine, Brink, Toscano, NicholsFINANCE
Purkey (Chairman), Orrock (Vice Chairman), Ware of Powhatan, Byron, Cole, Hugo, Cline, Frederick, Gear, Marshall of Danville, Lohr, Peace, Massie, Johnson, Melvin, Hull, Watts, Hall, Lewis, Caputo, Armstrong, MoranAPPROPRIATIONS
Putney (Chairman), Morgan, Tata, Hamilton (Vice Chairman), Ingram, May, Sherwood, Cox, Landes, Jones of Suffolk, Hogan, O’Bannon, Lingamfelter, Abbitt, Phillips, Scott of Fairfax, Joannou, Brink, Ware of Roanoke City, Howell of Norfolk, BaCote, Dance, Shannon, BowlingCOUNTIES, CITIES AND TOWNS
Ingram (Chairman), Marshall of Prince William, Orrock, Suit, Oder, Marshall of Danville (Vice Chairman), Iaquinto, Crockett-Stark, Lohr, Saxman, Poindexter, Massie, Merricks, Hall, Hull, Jones of Richmond City, Spruill, Ware of Roanoke City, Moran, Poisson, Caputo, NicholsCOMMERCE AND LABOR
Kilgore (Chairman), Morgan, Hargrove (Vice Chairman), Purkey, Byron, Ware of Powhatan, Nixon, Hugo, Janis, Rust, Marshall of Danville, Saxman, Cline, Plum, Johnson, Jones of Richmond City, Joannou, Melvin, Alexander, Sickles, McClellan, WardHEALTH, WELFARE AND INSTITUTIONS
Hamilton (Chairman), Orrock, Nixon (Vice Chairman), O’Bannon, Bell, Athey, Nutter, Frederick, Peace, Crockett-Stark, Pogge, Massie, Merricks, Spruill, Sickles, Ebbin, Howell of Norfolk, BaCote, Englin, Armstrong, Amundson, MorrisseyAGRICULTURE, CHESAPEAKE AND NATURAL RESOURCES
Morgan (Chairman), Cox, Sherwood, Ware of Powhatan (Vice Chairman), Wright, Orrock, Saxman, Hogan, Scott of Madison, Marshall of Danville, Lohr, Poindexter, Pogge, Plum, Shuler, Eisenberg, Shannon, Lewis, Bulova, Vanderhye, Mathieson, BouchardMILITIA, POLICE AND PUBLIC SAFETY
Sherwood (Chairman), Griffith, Kilgore, Wright (Vice Chairman), Carrico, Lingamfelter, Nutter, Athey, Janis, Cline, Gilbert, Poindexter, Merricks, Scott of Fairfax, Barlow, Shuler, Lewis, Miller of Norfolk, Poisson, Tyler, Bowling, MoranSCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
Byron (Chairman), May, Purkey, Marshall of Prince William, Nixon, Rust (Vice Chairman), Cosgrove, Nutter, Scott of Madison, Crockett-Stark, Peace, Miller of Manassas, Hugo, Watts, Eisenberg, Howell of Norfolk, Miller of Norfolk, Amundson, Toscano, Vanderhye, Mathieson, BouchardRULES
Howell of Stafford (Chairman), Putney, Hargrove, Griffith (Vice Chairman), Landes, Cox, Jones of Suffolk, Hogan, Abbitt, Hall, Joannou, Spruill, Johnson, Amundson, Armstrong
I might not be the only one here to notice that for a locality the size of Prince William, we’re just a little light on some of the more important committees. While I’m happy to see Jackson Miller on Courts of Justice and General Laws given his background as a police officer, we can’t get any of our delegates on Commerce and Labor, Finance or Rules? It’s not like we don’t have any senior delegates…
The opinions expressed here are solely the views of the author, and not representative of the position of any organization, political party, doughnut shop, knitting guild, or waste recycling facility, but may be correctly attributed to the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy. If anything in the above article has offended you, please click here to receive an immediate apology.
You can follow the discussion through the Comments feed.
5 Comments
Views: 828
Loading ...
Isn’t Frederick on Finance? He certainly wore that green jacket proudly at Harry Parrish’s funeral…
Yes he is. And now that he’s on transportation, one has to wonder what will come first. Money so that he can brag about bringing home the dollars in 2 years. Or transportation where he’ll more than likely sit and say nothing because he got into trouble for breaking rank last year and voted against the transportation package. While smart to have done so, now the Speaker is punishing him for it, which while he seems to be “working” for his voters-how much harm comes from not getting along with other members of your caucus when the time comes that you need a favor.
Politics is played during the campaign season but also during office, some politicians just don’t play the game that well.
Why, pray tell, is it “incomprehensibly dumb” to limit the number of bills that can be introduced? This forces Delegates to 1) carefully consider what the priorities of the House should be, 2) work with their colleagues to coordinate on legislation, and 3) eliminates some of the inane time wasters that everyone knows will never make it out of committee (which just so happens to be the majority of Bob Marshall’s legislative history). If a delegate really does have 11, 12, 13… really good ideas, then he should work with one of his colleagues who is a little “light” to get the bill on the docket.
There are 100 members in the House of Delegates. Limiting each member to 10 bills means the House will still need to consider 1000 bills in two months. Again, wasting limited time on bills that everyone knows will NEVER see the light of day seems somewhat counterproductive.
Why is this dumb? Put yourself in the shoes of a legislator who has eleven constituents lined up outside your door before the session starts, each one of which has a critical problem that they want you to address during the session. The include a father who lost a child, business owners who are suffering the unintended consequences of some piece of legislation passed during the last session, elderly folks who lost their house because taxes kept going up, a young family that can’t afford health insurance that a legislative fix could help resolve. In effect, each one of these constituents has a great idea, and you can help them, and you want to because that’s what a public servant does.
Which of these eleven are you going to pick as the person who is going to have to wait until next year? Which of these folks exercising their constitutionally protected right to seek redress of their government are you going to select as the victim of this arbitrary limit on bills you can introduce?
We elect our officials to get the things done we want to have done. For the rules to deliberately impede the ability of our elected officials to do that is incomprehensibly dumb.
Again, with 1000 bills available in the House, I would think all eleven constituents could indeed be served. If the legislation only benefits that one constituent and you can’t find some other delegate to take up the cause because he’s got constituents in similar straights, then maybe this is an issue the government shouldn’t be addressing. Again, if legislating is about getting things done, then the name attached as principle sponsor should be irrelevant.
But let’s be honest here. The problem isn’t about constituent services. The issue in this case are the pieces of legislation delegates like Bob Marshall propose every legislative session that have no credible chance of making is out of committee but are put forth as an effort to bolster the delegates bona fides or pander to a particular interest group. It happens on both sides of the aisle, but Marshall has elevated this practice to new heights in futility. When Marshall was called to task by Bruce Roemmelt in the 2005 delegate race on his dismal record of actually getting legislation passed (I believe Marshall had earned the title of “Most Ineffective Delegate” that year based on the number of pieces of proposed legislation he actually got passed), Marshall responded “He’s speaking as a non-legislator. I introduce bills to start discussions going.” Great. What a way to use the limited time available in a legislative session–introducing bills that have no chance of passage and are simply intended as conversation starters. In 2007, 13.5% of the bills Marshall introduced passed which means the 86.5% of his bills FAILED, most never making it out of one obscure subcommittee or another. That is an abysmal record of “getting things done.”
By the way, I do applaud Delegate Bob for taking a principled stand in the vote to stop the practice of killing a bill in subcommittee without a recorded vote. Marshall was the only Republican to stand up for open government (where he was joined by all 44 House Democrats).