The Untold Story   House Republicans warrant much of the criticism they get, but give them credit for this: They share power more fairly with minority Democrats than the Dems ever did with them.    Two wrongs do not make a right but they at least deserve to be reported. That revised axiom is particularly true when holding politicians accountable for abuses of power. Recent news articles deservedly scathed the Republican House majority in Virginia for failing to record sub-committee votes, but media reports and editorials implied that the Democrats, when they held the majority, were more benevolent and transparent with political power.   Let me be perfectly clear: Any political body in the United States that fails to record a public vote is wrong, period. While it is true that the sub-committee hearings and votes are open to the public and usually well attended, it should not be Joe Citizen’s job to count the raised hands or voice votes.   But how were things done during the preceding 130 years that the Democrats held the majority in the Virginia General Assembly?   Currently, the House Republican majority appoints committee members in proportion to each party’s numbers. In other words, if the Democrats have 45 percent of the general membership in the House, they receive that proportionate share of committee slots.  This proportionate power sharing arrangement, adopted by the Republican majority for no other apparent reason than to be fair, never existed under the Democrat rule of over a century.   Applying this self-imposed rule after the Democrats recently gained seats in the 2008 elections required House Republicans to remove some of their own party members from committees and replace them with Democrats. Such a voluntarily relinquishing of power is unprecedented in Virginia politics.   In the 1990s, Democrats dominated the powerful House Appropriations Committee, permitting Republicans only a few token representatives. In 1992, the Republicans had 18 members in the Senate, the Democrats 22, yet the Senate Finance Committee was made up of 12 Democrats and 3 Republicans.   Examples of “hogging” power and killing bills in the dark are easy to find under prior Democrat rule. The media should at least compare the two dynasties in a balanced manner.   To take another example, the Republican minority had no say (as in zero) in the selection of Virginia’s judges for 130 years. Yet, after Republicans took the majority they re-appointed over 90 percent of the Democrat incumbent judges and appointed or elevated other Democrats to the bench, much to the dismay of many Republican lawyers wanting to fill those positions. The anticipated “bloodbath” in the judiciary never occurred -- as was proper as a matter of principle and continuity. Selecting judges is serious business. But the Republicans' self restraint has been little discussed or appreciated by the media.   Most recently the media complained that the House majority would not allow a Democratic delegate to remove his own bill from a House floor vote. Apparently, House Republicans wanted to force Democrats to vote a pro-union bill up or down in order to show union members that, given a chance, some Democrats would vote for big business contrary to campaign promises.   This much-denounced parliamentary tactic was similar to one employed by former majority whip and accomplished Democrat quarterback Dickie Cranwell, when he introduced the new governor’s budget as his own and forced Republicans to publicly vote upon George Allen’s proposed cost cuts. The proposed budget reduced many facets of state government and the public was up in arms with the help of a little bit of demagoguery. Allen’s cuts did not touch education but that was not what was not the message to voters.   The tactic boomeranged when a novice Republican nearly beat Cranwell the next election. She simply showed voters the budget bill that Cranwell had introduced along with copies of news articles quoting Democrat leaders, including the majority whip, that the budget proposal would close essential services. Politicians can often times outfox themselves, a lesson that the Republican majority would be wise to recall.     The bottom line is that both parties use political procedures and obscure parliamentary rules to get their way. Neither party is pure nor do their histories indicate that they ever will be so. They are made up of humans after all, and they warrant constant oversight with balanced and full reporting.   On balance, the Republican House majority has been abundantly fair with committee appointments but continues to make the same mistake as their Democratic predecessors by refusing to record sub-committee votes. If the media will accurately report the fallacies and abuses of both parties, present and past, the public will be much better informed. Independents, after weighing both honest assessments, might then be more persuaded to vote accordingly come election time. They do, after all, control the outcome of most elections.   -- February 25, 2008