|
Some politicians sit on bigger committees, some have positions of power within the party (there are more titles than just Speaker of the House). Some are better than average at getting things done, at sponsoring big legislation, for instance. Some are just smarter than others. Some have a charisma that sways more votes than just their district, some have connections through relationships or past jobs.
Some are less powerful because they don't get things done, or they work on non-glamourous issues, or they are minor people on minor committees, or they are just lazy or bad at what they do.
I'm surprised anyone would consider Maxine Waters as not a top Democrat, though.
One thing is hard to put a name to, or even a finger on, but it's what makes our main champions less influential. A legislator has to be able to peddle his or her vote. If they are seen as flexible on some issues, then the other party can court them, and give them favors for votes. To counter, their own party has to give them favors back. Simple power brokerage. To win at that game, the legislato has to have a clean reputation, and the crossover vote has to be understandable as something other than a power play. Lieberman can cross over because of his supposed moral integrity, for instance, or a candidate can cross over when a bill affects their district in adverse ways. This ability to peddle their vote makes them more sought after by both parties. We don't like those politicos as much. We are attracted to the ones who are solid votes, often on single or narrowly focused issues. Cynthia McKinney, John Conyers, Sheila Jackson Lee, etc. What we like about them--their steadfastness--works against them being major players, except on their own issues.
Obviously that doesn't apply to everyone. It's just one way to gain power that our champions can't use.
I think too much. I'm going to make a root beer float. My head hurts, and I'm probably wrong anyway.
|