|
 |
 |
|
Lugar fears loss of influence of beloved Senate Foreign Relations Committee
Fewer and fewer lawmakers are staying on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee long enough to make a mark, Sen. Richard Lugar (R-Ind.) lamented Tuesday at a bittersweet Capitol Historical Society event honoring the panel he chaired for six years.
Speaking from experience – he lost a primary challenge to a Tea Party challenger earlier this year – Lugar acknowledged that “most members of this Committee must deal with the reality that few political benefits come from devoting oneself in the Senate to foreign policy.” But he said the panel needs members with expertise to hold the White House accountable.
“The Committee is responsible for some substantial areas of legislation, including the State Department Budget, foreign assistance, and, of course, approval of treaties. But in most years, its biggest impact comes from its roles as both partner and counterweight to the Administration’s actions on the global stage. The role of the Committee is to constantly question the President’s foreign policy activities and decisions, reinforcing some and redirecting or opposing others,” he said in prepared remarks.
“The Committee depends heavily on members who want to devote a substantial portion of their service to foreign policy and national security, regardless of other roles they may play in the Senate.”
“On the Republican side, the Conference rule prohibiting simultaneous service on any two of the so called “Super A” committees – Appropriations, Armed Services, Finance, and Foreign Relations – has led to many short tenures on our Committee. Conference Rules on the other side of the aisle are more lenient, but Democrats also have seen turnover.
Beyond conference dynamics, most members of this Committee must deal with the reality that fewpolitical benefits come from devoting oneself in the Senate to foreign policy. On the plus side, our members are invited to appear on Sunday morning talk shows more than most, and service on this Committee, however brief, is sometimes seen as a useful credential when seeking higher office. But the Foreign Relations Committee is a difficult platform from which to appeal for campaign funds and there is very little public spending that flows through this Committee to constituents. More to the point, absent a serious global crisis, foreign policy rarely tops the list of concerns of voters.”
