Change in House Leadership?
First off, I don't think we can really blame the leadership for the seat losses. Most of the losses have occured in areas that are turning more democratic. Also, some of our candidates have hurt themselves (i.e. Dick Black, Craddock, Marrs) which the House leadership has no major control over. I would even argue that they have kept us from losing more seats by picking up the 6th and 99th districts as well as defending some of the hotly contested NOVA seats.
Another problem the House faces is that the Senate does not have the same ideology as the House. They (in large part) want more tax increases and more spending. Some may say that the tax increase should fall upon Speaker Howell, et al b/c they failed to stop it, but it was a political move. Most of the "gang of 17" made a personal choice to vote for the increase to prevent a gov't shutdown (at least thats the reason I have been given). Did you notice that none of the leadership was in that group? Speaker Howell did ask Allen Louderback and others to not attend the committee meeting in order to get the vote to the House floor, but he couldn't stop the "gang of 17" guys from voting the way they did. Also, I personally do not believe the gang will vote to raise taxes again, based on the info we now have, as well as the surplus.
Maybe I am way off base, but I think our House leadership is doing a good job. I think we should stay with Howell, Griffith and Landes b/c in my opinion, they have done a good job. Defending a large majority like this one is tough, especially when there are so many different regions and issues to deal with. We are constantly having to make intra-party compromises to get things passed.
What do you folks think? Do we need a change?