ShareThis Page
Restrictions put on GOP committee chairs |

Restrictions put on GOP committee chairs

The Associated Press
Getty Images
Rep. Tom Cole, R-Okla., says House chairmen seeking different offices will be influenced by political concerns “no matter how hard they try.'

WASHINGTON — House Republicans on Friday adopted a new party rule that blocks powerful committee chairmen from seeking other office if they want to hold onto their post.

The rules change means chairmen would not be distracted from their legislative duties or party responsibilities while running for the Senate, governor or president. It originated from frustration that several recent heads of a powerful Appropriations subcommittee responsible for health and education were shirking their responsibilities while running for the Senate.

The rule authored by Rep. Tom Cole, R-Okla., means, for instance, that Wisconsin Rep. Paul Ryan would have to give up his gavel to chairmanship of the House Ways and Means Committee if he ran for president. Ryan currently is coveting the top position at Ways and Means. He could seek a waiver from the rule, however.

Aides said the rule arose from frustration that Rep. Jack Kingston, chairman of the Appropriations Labor, Health and Human Services Subcommittee, would not introduce or act on the panel’s important spending bill while running in a divisive GOP primary for Georgia’s Senate seat. Kingston’s predecessor, former Rep. Denny Rehberg, R-Mont., did the same thing in the 2012 campaign cycle.

Cole wouldn’t name names but said lawmakers running in races for other offices are inevitably distracted from their legislative work.

“They’re not going to have the time to do the job. No. 2, no matter how hard they try, their own political considerations are going to impinge upon the decisions they’re making,” Cole said. “We need to promote members that are going to stay here. And if they’re running for something else, their attention is somewhere else.”

Also Friday, GOP lawmakers rejected a bid by Rep. Mike Rogers, R-Ala., to weaken the party’s five-year-old ban on earmarks — those home-district projects such as roads, economic development grants, and research grants to local colleges and universities. Rogers wanted to allow lawmakers to earmark money to state and local governments.

Earmarks flourished in the early 2000s and often benefited private companies whose executives rewarded lawmakers with campaign cash. It also led members to vote for legislation they might otherwise have opposed.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.