- TEW List
- Posts
- Walz and Learning from the House
Walz and Learning from the House
Political scholar John Lawrence writes a nice short essay about Tim Walz, which is really a discussion of the value of the politics of the House of Representatives. Interesting way of describing the difference between the House and the Senate. T
hardline political news and analysis
Rumor has it that former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi lobbied hard for Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz to join the Democratic ticket as Kamala Harris’ vice presidential running mate. If accurate, Pelosi was not alone; many other House members also quietly weighed in on behalf of the 60-year old Minnesotan who had one of the most moderate voting records during his dozen years in the House, often working across the aisle with a dwindling group of collaborative Republicans on issues benefiting veterans. “I know that he understands our world,” said Rep. Ann Kuster (NH), one of the leading Democratic centrists.
This enthusiasm for Walz was not due simply to collegial sentimentalism but because House members welcome the presence on a national ticket of someone who hails from their unique experience: the tumultuous world of House politics.
You have to go all the way back to 1932 to find a vice president who had been a sitting House member at the time of his election. A number have been nominated — Geraldine Ferraro, William E. Miller, Jack Kemp and Paul Ryan — but not since Speaker John Nance Garner have House members had a recent colleague one heartbeat from the presidency.
(OK, for the sticklers out there, yes, a sitting House member, Speaker John McCormack was “one heartbeat from the presidency” in 1963-1964 after Lyndon Johnson became president and before the 25th Amendment allowed for the appointment of a vice president. And the popular Gerald Ford was House minority leader when he was appointed vice president in 1973 by the scandal-plagued Richard Nixon, specifically to buy good will with House members who might soon be voting on a Watergate-driven impeachment.) [NOTE: Joel Jankowsky points out correctly that his former boss, Speaker Carl Albert, briefly was “a heartbeat away” while Congress considered the appointments of Gerald Ford and Nelson Rockefeller to the vice presidency after the ratification of the 25th amendment.]
There are many reasons why House members are rarely selected for the national ticket. Obviously, they represent a small fraction of constituents as compared with most governors or senators. Only a handful have names that resonate with more than an infinitesimal portion of the national electorate. Being from a small district, a House member may have little or no influence in even helping a ticket carry his or her home state. Many serve the role of balancing the ticket ideologically or sending a message. Miller was selected by Goldwater in 1964 because he exasperated President Lyndon B. Johnson; Ferraro benefitted from a diversity demands on Walter Mondale in 1988, where signs on the convention floor generically had endorsed a “Woman Vice President Now!”
However the experience of House service is a valuable one, quite distinct from that of governors and senators. House members have only a two-year term, which effectively means they are in permanent campaign mode, honing messages and strategies to ward off general election and, increasingly, primary challengers. There are many downsides to this ridiculously brief term (many of the Founding Fathers, concerned that the longer between elections the greater the likelihood of losing touch with constituent demands, had favored annual election for House members!) House members spent far too much time raising money, flying or driving back and forth to hold town halls and district office hours, which cut into substantive legislative work on Capitol Hill.
On the other hand, they are highly attuned to the election cycle like no one else in politics. Pelosi is fond of noting that representatives, unlike senators, “go home every weekend and put their hands on the hot stove” of public opinion. Senators can cast a tough vote and have years to win back voter support; House members have no such insulation from their votes or their voters.
The nature of debate in the House also uniquely prepares representatives for a tough campaign. On the House floor, most debate occurs under the five minute rule, which limits the amount of time anyone but a bill manager or party leader can offer their views. When representatives address the House on non-legislative matters at the beginning of the day, they are limited to one-minute speeches. Senators can drone on for hours to an empty chamber while over in the House, there is a staccato debate of charge and counter charge even if the argument is unlikely to actually alter anyone’s vote.
The constrained nature of House debate compels a member to hone the most effective rhetorical zingers and to react on the spot to misstatements by opponents. Certainly, his years as ranking member of the Veterans Affairs Committee provided Walz with this experience and it made him into an effective and entertaining orator. House members are often contemptuous of senators for their undisciplined loquaciousness. “Man, you know you’re too senatorial in your speech making,” former House Whip Jim Clyburn advised President Biden, who spent 36 years in the upper chamber. “You gotta learn to do like we do in the House. We do one-minute speeches in the House. So, we know how to get to the point right away.”
Having Walz, a House veteran, on the ticket likely has both substantive and strategic advantages for Democrats. Garner, the last sitting House Democrat to join a successful national ticket, complained the vice presidency “isn’t worth a bucket of warm spit” (although some accounts substitute a colorful profanity). These days, Walz’ former House colleagues are doubtless salivating at the prospect of having one of their own at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.
Advance order: Paperback version of Arc of Power: Inside Nancy Pelosi’s Speakership 2005-2010 (coming out September 28, 2024); available now in hardback and Kindle