Will the "altruistic" Democrats give equal seat numbers on committees as the Republicans did with a similar -

Question

majority?

Answer 1

Not a chance. It has always been the case that Committee chaiirman belong to the party in the majority. That is how they carrry out their agenda. It is also the reward for winning and for the senior party member in that committee. I don't know of a single exception to that practice.

Answer 2

I am sorry but you are misinformed.

All the Congressional Standing Committees currently have republican majorities that reflect the current makeup of the the House, EXCEPT the Special Committee on conduct, which has an equal number of democrats and republicans, five each.

With the new congress, all the committees will have democratic majorities that reflect the makeup of the house, except for the Committee on Conduct, which will have
and equal number of democrats and republicans

Answer 3

I hope not, civility needs to return to Washington.

The republicans would not allow a vote on a bill unless there was a majority of republicans that would vote for the bill. Even if most people in the body was in favor of legislation this did not matter. The republicans would hide amendments filled with pork in the middle of the night and force a vote before people could read the changes. They did not include democrats during negotiations. The republicans forced lobbying firms to fire democrats and higher republicans then they forced the republican lobbyists to donate to campaigns. If the dems do the same thing I will vote against them in the next election. The only thing they should do is tell any lobbying firm that employs Delay, you will not have access if he is employed by your firm. Get Delay out of DC.

Answer 4

an identical reason Libs block legislations in a Conservative controled abode, the media calls it "protecting off" the Republicans. at the same time as Republicans do an identical situation, it really is call" obstructionist". and also you Libs ask your self why we scream media bias. shall we get this looked after out. capacity shifts decrease to and fro because the generic public votes. once you adult males get in, you steamroll legislations, no compromise (no longer once from Nov 2 and earlier to the finest generic). And we get from the President on nationwide television to a Senior Senator "nicely, elections have effects" and Obamacare became compelled by (bribes and all). Now the abode is going Conservative and Libs are dictating that Conservatives opt to compromise. the position became the compromise at the same time as the Libs were in cost? Screw that. Libs Boss Hogged their way round with the abode and senate, we positioned a end to it. the Senate is next, and bigger than probable the President too. And after we Boss hog our way round you Libs will be screaming bloody homicide and stressful Compromise. and that i'd in my view moist myselfe if the recent President reported for the duration of what's meant to be assembly about COMPROMISE to easily say "elections have effects" bypass by the motions of a nationwide assembly, ignore about each and every thing they said and only ram our regulation by besides (even with the truth that, this can get you kicked out of place of work like the Dems, perchance no longer one of those good situation after all).

Answer 5

I specifically voted against the "altruistic" Republicans - I really mean that.

Answer 6

Democrats must be fair in the assignment of committee heads and members so that theose who are qualified can be accommodated for the good of the Congress and the country.

Answer 7

altruistic=unrealistic

Answer 8

Very doubtful!!!!