After contentious caucus meeting, Hunt is in; Nolan is out - but what's next?

Kari Chisholm

After a six-seat loss in the November elections dropped the House Democrats from a 36-seat supermajority into a 30-30 tie with the House Republicans, there's been a lot of chatter about the makeup of the House Democrats' leadership team. And, of course, the bigger question: Will the Ds or the Rs find a way to seize power with an aisle-crosser - or will they work out a co-governance model as the Senate did in 2003?

Chapter 1 is now in the books. Last night, the House Democrats had a closed caucus meeting in which they elected their leadership team. Without a clear path to the Speakership, the Democrats were down one spot - and in the game of musical chairs that ensued, majority leader Mary Nolan was left without a seat at the leadership table.

While the vote for leader is a secret ballot (and a vote whose exact totals are unknown even to caucus members), it's clear that both Dave Hunt and Mary Nolan had substantial bases of support inside the caucus. Ultimately, Hunt prevailed as the Democratic leader, but it wasn't pretty.

WW's Nigel Jaquiss described the proceedings as "a verbal clash between Hunt and Nolan" - a description that I've confirmed independently with a number of folks in the room (though one of my sources went further and called it a "screaming match.") [Update: At least one legislator, Rep. Peter Buckley (D-Ashland), disputes the characterization of the discussion as a "screaming match" as posted in the comments.]

In a typical year, the top dogs in the two caucuses are the candidates they put forward for Speaker - usually in a pro forma way, since one party has a clear majority.

But in a 30-30 situation, all bets are off. While Speaker Hunt would surely like to hang on to his seat, it's unclear whether the Republican caucus will be willing to even negotiate with Hunt - who has developed a reputation as a bare-knuckled political street fighter. It's also unclear whether Hunt would have the unananimous support of his fellow Democrats - given the contentious battle with Mary Nolan.

So, what's next?

The House Democrats will assign a handful of their members to negotiate with GOP leader Bruce Hanna and his team.

What's at stake? Oregon's Speaker of the House typically has a lot of power - the power to appoint committee chairs, the power to shut down committees, the power to decide which bills come to the floor, and more.

But all of these are negotiable items. One thing that's not negotiable - that committee memberships will be proportionate to the overall makeup of the body. In other words, every committee is going to be evenly split between Democrats and Republicans. Update: A brief correction - whether the committees are split proportionately is a matter of legislative rule (a rule implemented in 2007 by then-Speaker Jeff Merkley). Thus, committee makeup (50/50 or not) is a negotiable item, though it'd be unlikely to see that change in a 30/30 House, no matter who gains control.

Given that, it seems more likely that we'll have a negotiated power-sharing agreement rather than a forcible seizure of power by getting one or two aisle-crossers. Why? Because if one side seizes power, the losing side will be outraged - and will be able to deny a majority vote to every single bill in every committee (except perhaps, ones where the aisle-crosser sits.)

So, the first chapter is written. But this is where it gets interesting. Stay tuned.

By Kari Chisholm Nov. 11, 2010