(See below what Speaker Boehner said about the Committee composition (per FNC’s Chad Pergram.)
I don’t agree with the Speaker – the split should be 7-6 and not 7-5. Of course he probably thinks, “so what, you don’t get a vote.” He is right. I don’t get a vote but I think a 7-6 split is wiser. Republicans have the majority in the House, so should have 1 more than the Democrats. I think making the split larger than 1 reflects poorly on the fairness of the panel — whether it a just criticism or not. (By the way, I think Congressman Trey Gowdy is a great choice. In all my dealings with him, and in my observation of him, he seems married to the facts….not a political animal.)
The justification by the Speaker for the 2 person margin is that Leader Pelosi had a bigger split for a panel. That is not a good reason to do 7-5 but does show what is wrong with Washington. Just because something was done that someone thinks unfair before, or even was unfair, is just not a reason to do it again here and now. Plus, if precedent is to be a guide, rather than relying on an unfair split in the past, how about a new precedent….a good, fair split now….and thus the 1 more person in the majority party becomes the new precedent for the future. PS – there should be some provision that if a committee member gets sick and serve or can’t serve for some other reason that he / she can be replaced with a member of that same political party.
Urgent: Boehner on Pelosi’s demands for Benghazi cmte: I think the 7-5 split is … fair, fairer than [Pelosi's] global warming panel.