Waxman gets early edge over Dingell

House Democrats are set to decide one key committee chairmanship on Thursday — a decision that could spawn a “really messy” struggle for another gavel.

A key Democratic committee gave Rep. Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) an edge over Rep. John Dingell (D-Mich.) Wednesday in the fight for the Energy and Commerce Committee chairmanship. But a Waxman victory could open up another battle for a gavel.

{mosads}The Democratic Steering and Policy Committee voted 25-22 to endorse Waxman over the incumbent Dingell for the spot.

But the difference is academic, as the names of both men will go to the Democratic Caucus for a vote Thursday to settle a fight that has been brewing since the day after the election. Even though a majority of the caucus decides who will get the gavel, the committee’s recommendation does hold weight with many members.

If Waxman wins, he’d give up the chairmanship of the Oversight and Government Reform Committee, from which he has hounded the Bush administration and corporate CEOs.

The maneuvering for that post broke open Wednesday between senior committee members: Reps. Edolphus Towns (D-N.Y.), Carolyn Maloney (D-N.Y.) and Elijah Cummings (D-Md.).

Towns, the most senior Democrat on Oversight after Waxman, told The Hill that he hopes Dingell wins. But he said if Waxman prevails, he wants the gavel at Oversight.

“I do feel [Dingell] is going to win,” Towns said while leaving a Congressional Black Caucus news conference. But if Dingell loses, Towns continued, “I would definitely be a candidate. I have the seniority. I’m next in line. I’ve been around here 26 years.”

The next in line for Waxman’s gavel is Rep. Paul Kanjorski (D-Pa.), but he is expected to keep his subcommittee chairmanship on the Financial Services Committee.

After him comes Maloney, then Cummings, who have both expressed interest in chairing the committee.

Maloney issued a statement Wednesday expressing that interest, but said she’d back Towns if he wants the job.

“If the chair of Oversight and Government Reform becomes open, I would support Mr. Towns,” Maloney’s statement said. “If Mr. Towns were not a candidate, I would be — and I believe I would make the strongest case, having served the caucus by my work in helping to save the census and advancing a reform agenda in Government Oversight,” Maloney said.

Maloney’s yielding would set up a two-person contest between Towns and Cummings.

“The congressman has said from the beginning that, while he would be extremely honored to take Waxman’s place in moving the committee forward, he respects that he is not the next in line based on seniority,” Cummings spokeswoman Jennifer Kohl said.

The hopes of Maloney and Cummings appear to be lingering because of the concerns of some in leadership about Towns’s ability to carry the Oversight torch in a post-Waxman era.

Towns’s absence at all but one of the committee’s recess hearings on the financial meltdown, including the AIG bailout hearing, is highlighted by critics.

Towns’s office has pushed back against any such concerns — none of which have been made publicly — saying a surgery kept him sidelined in October, and pointing to the seven subcommittee hearings that Towns held in 2008.

Democrats don’t want to see a fight between two senior members of the Congressional Black Caucus. And leaders aren’t excited about the possibility of having a second chairmanship decision before the full caucus, where rank-and-file members will have to choose between two influential colleagues.

On the other hand, no one wants to hide behind the excuse of seniority and have a less active chairman.
“This one’s really messy,” sighed a Democratic leadership aide.

Aides have said that if Waxman wins Energy and Commerce, the Oversight race could go to Steering and Policy on Thursday. It’s not clear when it would go to the full caucus.

But Dingell supporters said the close vote in the secret ballot in the steering committee was actually a good sign for Dingell’s chances to win in Thursday’s secret ballot before the entire caucus.

Rep. Stephanie Herseth Sandlin (D-S.D.), a Dingell supporter, said in a press call after the committee vote that the panel is stacked against Dingell “geographically and politically.”

Rep. Jim Matheson (D-Utah) said he believes that the caucus will give greater consideration to the issue of fairness, as well as to constituents’ desire to elect representatives who will “stop the partisan bickering and get things done.”

“And I don’t think the case has been made as to why [Dingell] shouldn’t be there,” Matheson said. “In terms of what’s fair and what’s equitable, he ought to be there.”

The 25-22 vote technically makes Waxman the nominee of the Steering and Policy Committee. But since Dingell got more than 13 votes, he is also eligible for consideration by the caucus.

Still, it is remarkable, though not without precedent, that a sitting chairman has not been recommended by the committee. It hasn’t happened since 1996, when the Steering and Policy Committee endorsed Rep. John LaFalce (N.Y.) to be the top Democrat on the Banking Committee over incumbent ranking member Henry Gonzales (D-Texas), although LaFalce later withdrew his challenge.

Dingell and Waxman each appeared before the committee. According to a participant, Dingell emphasized that he has carried the torch for national healthcare, passed from his father, for his nearly 53 years in Congress. He has introduced a universal healthcare bill in each Congress he’s been here.

Waxman, who is considered the more liberal contender, told committee members that he is the better person to bring the agenda of President-elect Barack Obama to the House floor.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) is a member of the committee. Co-chairwoman Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.) would not say if Pelosi spoke, but indicated that the Speaker did not change her neutral stance.