Booman does all the work so I don’t have to. I was just talking about this with another progressive, and of the likelihood of investigatory fireworks in a Democratic majority Congress. I’m not counting any unhatched chickens here, just throwing out another reason why Rove and KennyBoi are shitting bricks every time they look at the latest poll numbers:

Every committee in Congress has a chairperson from the majority party and a ranking member from the minority party. The seats are basically assigned by seniority and by the assent of the caucuses. It almost all cases, the ranking member stands to become the chairperson if control of Congress switches from one party to the other. There are some exceptions to that rule, but the fact that Arlen Specter remains the Chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee is a powerful reminder of how much deference is payed to seniority when assigning these positions. Of course, the GOP constantly threatens to remove Arlen, which keeps him in line.

The Democrats in the House have been out of power for 12 years. Many of their more moderate members have been beaten, as the GOP has come to dominate the south. As a result, many of the most liberal members of the House have risen to the position of Ranking Member. Using the Progressive Punch ranking system I lay out where members stand on the scale of progressivism. I give their number (which is a percentage of how often they vote the ’progressive’ position), and then their rank. A rank of ’1’ would mean that they are the most progressive member of the House. 435 would be the lowest. Raul Grijalva (AZ-07) is ranked as the most progressive member. Gene Taylor (MS-04) is ranked 202, the least progressive Democrat. For further clarity on where members stand, I will give you the scores of some well known members. Members that rank in the top 25% for progressive issues (in the whole House) are indicated with an *. Members that are ranked in the top 25% of the Democratic caucus are given a +: edited b/c I’m too lazy to do the original bold/underline system Boo used.

Nancy Pelosi 93.6, 22nd most progressive member*+
Bernie Sanders 92.7, 30*+
Cynthia McKinney 90.45, 43*+
Dennis Kucinich 86.84, 86*

RANKING MEMBERS
Agriculture: Collin Peterson (MN) 57.4, 199
Appropriations: David Obey (WI) 87.7, 69*
Armed Services: Ike Skelton (MI) 59.26, 198
Budget: John Spratt (SC) 75.66, 155
Education: George Miller (CA) 93.54, 24*+
Energy and Commerce: John Dingell (MI) 84.29, 112
Ethics: Howard Berman (CA) 86.21, 87
Financial Services: Barney Frank (MA) 92.8, 28*+
Goverment Reform: Henry Waxman (CA), 91,86, 35*+
Homeland Security: Bennie Thompson (MS), 86.0, 98*
House Administration: Juanita Millender-McDonald (CA) 86.87, 85*
International Relations: Tom Lantos (CA), 87.06, 81*
Intelligence: Jane Harman (CA), 75.19, 159 but rumored to be going to Alcee Hastings (FL), 87.76, 70*
Judiciary: John Conyers, Jr. (MI), 93.62, 21*+
Resources: Nick Rahall (WV), 75.58, 156
Rules: Louise McIntosh Slaughter (NY), 90.37, 44*+
Science: Bart Gordon (TN), 63.83, 182
Small Business: Nydia M. Velazquez (CA), 94.11, (tied) 11*+
Transportation: James Oberstar (MN), 86.51, 93*
Veteran’s Affairs: Bob Filner (CA), 93.67, 20*+
Ways and Means: Charlie Rangel (NY), 90.12, 46*+

What this demonstrates is that Progressives stand to dominate a new Congress on most issues. Madman has no faith that a new minted Democratic majority will have any more balls than the old party. He’s almost certainly wrong. A basic look at the ranking members tells the story.

Myself, I greatly relish the thought of Chairman Conyers having a boatload of Judiciary committee hearings.