This is the talk page for discussing WikiProject Politics/American politics and anything related to its purposes and tasks.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed

Archives: 1, 2Auto-archiving period: 30 days

Politics: American Project‑class

This page is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles Project This page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. This page is supported by American politics task force.

United States: Government Project‑class

This page is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles Project This page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. This page is supported by WikiProject U.S. Government.

I'm opening a discussion on how to organise the infoboxes of long-running Congressmen and senators in the wake of editing to Dianne Feinstein's article. I've detected inconsistencies in the positions that are on top, and those that are at the bottom, committee names, and which positions are included in the infobox. This is especially problematic with senators, who can hold several committee chairmanships, ranking memberships, party offices (named differently if in the majority or minority) and constitutional offices (the president pro tempore).

Inconsistencies are worsened when editors with their own views on organisation, due to the lack of a coherent policy, pick and choose what to include and leave out. It reaches critical levels when vandalism occurs, risking incomplete reversions to the unvandalized version. To editors learning about members of Congress, inconsistencies make the infoboxes clumsy and detract from the Wikipedia experience. I believe we should form a coherent policy on what and what not to include.

The issue has several facets, which I am dividing into subsections. Many of these can apply to U.S. representatives as well, but seniority and long-term committee chairmanships are not as prevalent in the modern House of Representatives.

General organization

Long-term U.S. senators, as stated before, hold many positions during their tenure. For such cases, this risks overpopulating the infobox. Here are the options for how to order them, with article examples:

• (Option 1a) Post-Senate offices > U.S. senator > constitutional offices + related (president pro tem emeritus) > Senate party leadership, NO committee positions > prior offices in chronological order: Robert Byrd (D-WV), Ted Stevens (R-AK). Personally favour this one.

• (Option 1b) Post-Senate offices > U.S. senator > constitutional offices + related > Senate party leadership AND committee positions > prior offices in chronological order: Patrick Leahy (D-VT), Ted Kennedy (D-MA)

• (Option 2a) Post-Senate offices > Constitutional offices > U.S. senator > Senate party leadership, NO committee positions > prior offices in chronological order: Daniel Inouye (D-HI)

• (Option 2b) Post-Senate offices > Constitutional offices > U.S. senator > Senate party leadership AND committee positions > prior offices in chronological order: Strom Thurmond (R-SC) (note that a related-to-constitutional office, pro tem emeritus, is listed below his U.S. Senate tenure), Max Baucus (D-MT)

• (Option 3) Post-Senate offices > Constitutional offices > Senate party leadership AND committee positions > U.S. senator > prior offices in chronological order: John C. Stennis (D-MS), Milton Young (R-ND), Warren Magnuson (D-WA), Richard Russell Jr. (D-GA), Orrin Hatch (R-UT)

• (Option 4) Post-Senate offices > U.S. senator > prior (non-committee) offices in chronological order: John L. McClellan (D-AR)

There are two other aspects to consider:

• Incumbent U.S. senators and representatives with multiple chairmanships. Should we include their leadership of previous committees as well, as with Patty Murray (D-WA) and Bernie Sanders (Ind.-VT)?
• Members of Congress with prior constitutional high office appointed to non-congressional offices after their tenure. Tom Foley (D-WA), who was the 49th speaker of the House and leader of the House Democratic Caucus until 1995, became President's Intelligence Advisory Board chair and then ambassador to Japan thereafter. Should we move his tenure as Speaker to the top of the infobox?

Committee chairmanships

On the topic of committee chairmanships, some long-term senators have led more than 3, even 4 committees, over multiple periods of their party's majority, like Chuck Grassley (R-IA), who chaired the Senate Finance Committee during 3 separate periods over 20 years. If we keep the committees in the infobox, we can collapse the area with committees, like with Grassley, John Kerry and Barbara Mikulski, which I carried over to Richard Shelby. To be collapsed, said senator or representative should have held 3 or more chairmanships, 2 or more if they held it over multiple separate terms.

If we use Option 1a or 2a above, we can also apply what we have with Joe Biden, with no committee chairmanships in the infobox but in an "Other offices" module at the bottom.

I also believe we should also keep the gender-neutral term "Chair", used on modern members of Congress but not on older ones.

Ranking memberships (and s-start)

I believe that, except for incumbent members of Congress, all ranking memberships should be removed from the infobox. The same applies to vice chairmanships of the Senate Appropriations Committee and Senate Intelligence Committee, which are essentially ranking memberships with a different name. Ranking members, especially earlier ones, have fewer secondary sources to confirm their existence.

Any mentions should be relegated to the S-start template at the bottom of the article.

Committee naming

Most members of Congress with committee leadership positions in the infobox use the short name of the committees. For example, instead of the Senate Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry Committee, "Senate Agriculture Committee" is substituted, omitting "Nutrition, and Forestry".

Conversely, the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee is rarely shortened ( Judd Gregg and Ted Kennedy are exceptions). Meanwhile, Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee is inconsistent, with Rand Paul and Rob Portman being short and Gary Peters and Joe Lieberman being long.

Occasionally, we have instances where the full name is added.

Conclusion

I hope I can gather feedback and consensus on what should be done in all these cases. Pinging @ Thrakkx, Einsof, and Therequiembellishere:, who were part of a debate on inclusion of Dianne Feinstein's committee positions in the infobox. Thank you! SuperWIKI ( talk) 17:12, 30 September 2023 (UTC) SuperWIKI ( talk) 17:12, 30 September 2023 (UTC) reply

Responses

The purpose of an infobox is to summarize (and not supplant) key facts that appear in the article. The less information it contains, the more effectively it serves that purpose, allowing readers to identify key facts at a glance. For the vast majority of senators, their committee assignments, constitutional roles, and ranking memberships are not notable enough to go into an infobox. In news articles, those roles are not even mentioned unless they have direct relevance to the news at hand. Even so, in the recent news about Tommy Tuberville holding up military promotions, many articles didn't even bother to mention his chairmanship of the Armed Services Committee, even though it was directly relevant to the situation (e.g. NBC, WaPo, LATimes). Not even does his own Wikipedia article mention his chairmanship, infobox or otherwise. It's clear that this information is barely if ever viewed as important. That's why I think Option 4 is the way to go. In special circumstances, obviously other items can be mentioned. For example, Patrick Leahy is known for being a longtime senator and so his role as president pro tempore is notable enough to be in the infobox. One editor argued on Diane Feinstein's article that her committee chairmanships are "fundamental to her history". Sure, which is why those roles are discussed in the body of her article; however, she will primarily be remembered as a senator, and just that—not as the chair of the Senate Narcotics Caucus from 2009 to 2015. Thrakkx ( talk) 17:35, 30 September 2023 (UTC) reply

There's a reason for that - Tuberville doesn't chair the Armed Services Committee, that's Jack Reed. He's only spent 2 years on the committee, barely enough time to gain seniority for the leadership, and he's in the minority party. He'd have to be a senior member of the committee in a GOP majority to be eligible. And the president pro tempore has almost always been the longest-serving senator of the majority party so the PPT has always been a longtime senator, so that can be included in any case + being a constitutionally-mandated office. Sorry about the nitpickiness. SuperWIKI ( talk) 18:00, 30 September 2023 (UTC) reply

I think that aside from personal data, the only items that should appear in infoboxes are things that can reasonably be called occupations as understood by the average reader. Being a senator is an occupation; being a general is an occupation; being on a senate committee isn't. Constitutional offices could go either way (many readers probably would want to know, at a glance, if someone was speaker of the house), but even that may lead to too much clutter. I think that most closely aligns with option 4. Einsof ( talk) 23:24, 30 September 2023 (UTC) reply

If so, shld we apply the Biden precedent, and place committee offices below the infobox in an "Other offices" module? I mean, if we apply option 4 we'll have to remove it from the Joe Biden article. Don't forget, we also have party leadership positions to consider - which do we include? Majority and Minority Leaders should be included, but whips, deputy whips, caucus secretaries, etc? What should be done?

We too have all the terminology issues to consider, if people in favour of maintaining committee positions weigh in. My post is quite hefty. SuperWIKI ( talk) 04:12, 1 October 2023 (UTC) reply

First, thanks for opening the discussion and notifying me of it. While I don't work on U.S. articles, I tackle similar aspects covering Bolivian lawmakers. My personal view is that infoboxes are best served including only the most relevant political positions (president, vice president, speaker, senator/representative, secretary, etc.). For congressmen, positions within the legislature and individual parties' internal structure are best included in prose.

I've cited articles such as John McCain as examples. Positions that rotate frequently depending on majority/minority control of Congress – that otherwise clutter infoboxes – would do well to be moved to prose. I'm also partial to hiding the information in the infobox – as is done by different means on the articles for Richard Shelby and Joe Biden – but do have to note that the hidden function doesn't, well, function on mobile.

In other words, option 4. Krisgabwoosh ( talk) 05:32, 1 October 2023 (UTC) reply

Personally i believe we must have committee positions in the infobox they are imprortant in what order i dont care as long as for the Collapsed infobox section personally i dont like it and i dont think it should be used but i am open to alternatives Friendlyhistorian ( talk) 09:09, 1 October 2023 (UTC) reply

I'm preparing a lengthy response to all the above here, but I'll need some time to compose it. SuperWIKI ( talk) 10:42, 1 October 2023 (UTC) reply

I'd just like to draw attention to a few test cases I experimented in my sandbox with a few years ago regarding this and the use of the suboffice infobox parameters for committee assignments. I've always disliked the extremely long infoboxes that some long serving officeholders seem to have. Connormah ( talk) 19:26, 1 October 2023 (UTC) reply

• Option 4 largely to to infobox bloat and inconsistencies across subjects (this should also be the same for all officeholders, not just US Senators, FWIW). That said, there are a few positions in the US that should be noted - speaker of a chamber, president pro tempore - but beyond that, caucus and committee membership should be in the lede or in the body of the article as appropriate. -- Enos733 ( talk) 03:57, 3 October 2023 (UTC) reply

  Actually thinking about this some more, I would put the order like this in the US:

  President > Vice President > Pre or Post-Congress office (if higher in the order of precedence [so Governor > Cabinet]) > Senate constitutional office > Senator > House constitutional office > House of Representatives > State constitutional office > State Legislature (Senate > House) > Local office (arranged by dates of service) (if there is an existing page for that local office, unless that is what the subject is know for)

  So, by using the order of precedence, we are consistent about which position occupies the top slot, which is usually what the person is most known for. This also avoids the Tom Foley post-Congress position and while there may be some bloat for individuals who end up being leaders of a legislative chamber, but for most readers, the most prominent facts are in the info box.

  - Enos733 ( talk) 04:16, 3 October 2023 (UTC) reply

  I'm still typing up my full response along with specimen infoboxes.

  What are your thoughts on ambassadors who shifted to/from higher office? Easy to arrange for top people like Tom Foley and Walter Mondale, but not so much for people like Howard Baker, Mike Mansfield and Max Baucus.

  Same goes for military officers who later attained high office like David Petraeus, Lloyd Austin, Jim Mattis and Eric Shinseki? I'm cautiously certain that military offices should be removed aside from service chiefs, commanding generals and JCS chairman ( Ulysses S. Grant, Dwight D. Eisenhower, William J. Crowe as precedents). Petraeus, Mattis, John Abizaid and Austin are publicly known as CENTCOM commander (Petraeus especially) before gaining political or diplomatic office, so iffy on if combatant commands should be included on a case-by-case basis. Deputy four-star positions and below should be removed. SuperWIKI ( talk) 06:09, 3 October 2023 (UTC) reply

  If your question is about where to put ambassadors in an infobox of politicians, ambassadors do not fit neatly in the order of precedence, as they are high when at their post, but low when back in the United States (with some exceptions). So, my instinct is that the top info-box item is the position the individual is most known for (with limited exceptions that can be justified, such as a former Speaker of the US House who serves a term in the Senate, or appointment to a Cabinet position in the US).

  If your question is should the infoboxes of ambassadors or military leaders be streamlined, I would agree. - Enos733 ( talk) 05:55, 4 October 2023 (UTC) reply

My response

To begin, I will restate the underlying issue. Including all of a U.S. senator's party and committee leadership positions in the infobox needlessly inflates the IB's size. That defeats its purpose, which is, and I quote, to summarize (and not supplant) key facts that appear in the article. I also complement Thrakkkx's point from the same WP:INFOBOX page - that an article should remain complete with its summary infobox ignored.

However, we can sharpen the tenor of this debate. Is the problem that:

• the infobox is overbloated with positions (readability/conciseness), or...
• that the aforementioned "puffery" contravenes WP:INFOBOX (Wiki policy)?

Based on prior responses, Connormah and Krisgabwoosh lean on the former, while Thrakkkx suggests the latter. The focus is significant - it determines whether a decision will affect the top 5% of longtime senators who shuffle between committee leadership positions ( Grassley) or party positions that change based on seat gains and losses ( Reid, McConnell), or every single senator who has held so much as two party/committee positions in the Senate.

To earlier comments, I counsel caution on going full-bore towards removing every top position within the Senate, as displayed by an exact implementation of Option 4. If we take the approach that the central problem is contravention of WP:INFOBOX, we may have to apply our consensus to all current and former senators uniformly, regardless of infobox size. Assuming we get that far, we'll have to deal with reversions when any one editor thinks a position is essential - whenever a news article highlights it, for example. Certain senators and senators who became presidents may fall into the domain of other Wiki communities (e.g. WikiProject U.S. History). Being too hasty risks reversion by unknowing or unwilling editors, and we'll have egg all over our face.

Despite WP:INFOBOX saying that articles should be able to stand alone without one, image and positional recognition in an infobox is helpful to the uninitiated user. It just so happens that the Senate's two most powerful figures, the Majority and Minority Leader, have titles reliant on control of the Senate, which splits terms and lengthens the infobox for every majority gain. I supplement Krisgabwoosh's comment on moving intra-Senate positions to the prose. Not every Senate floor leader is like John McCain and Bernie Sanders, able to thrive on name recognition alone. Within reason, leadership positions help distinguish high-ranking senators from lesser counterparts only identifiable on the infobox as "United States Senator". At the risk of subjectivity, I think Harry Reid is better remembered nationally for being the Senate leader who invoked the nuclear option for judicial nominees, and not for being Senator Harry Reid.

I disagree with Enos733's suggestion, if I am interpreting it correctly, to strictly adhere to the order of precedence. While it's a fashion today for House members to promote to governor of their state, former governors are also appointed to a President's cabinet. The Biden cabinet has three ( Vilsack, Raimondo, Granholm), Trump's cabinet had three ( Perdue, Perry, Haley), Obama's cabinet had three (Vilsack, Locke, Sebelius) and Bush 43's cabinet had eight ( Ashcroft, Kempthorne, Johanns, Schafer, Thompson, Leavitt, Ridge). Being better known as governor or Cabinet member differs among individuals - Ashcroft is recognised for his post-9/11 contributions as Attorney General rather than as Missouri governor. The order of precedence only lists a governor above Cabinet members within their own state - anywhere else, Cabinet members rank above the governor. In cases like this, I believe it best to defer to chronology - recent offices first, then earlier ones below.

Recommendations

To summarise, here are the major changes that I think should be made. Please find infobox examples below

• The president pro tempore should stay in the infobox above the U.S. senator office. For Grassley, his current offices should be over his PPT term until he retires. Honorary titles should be removed for senators, but the dean of the House ( Dingell, Rogers, etc.), who, unlike the Senate dean, has the duty of swearing in the speaker, should remain. Charles Sumner would be among those affected, as Senate dean is prominently featured on his (sparse) infobox.

• Senate Majority and Minority Leader should be combined into the umbrellas of the senator's party leadership position ( Dem caucus chair, GOP conference leader), with majority-minority periods noted in Template:Efn. The use of Efn is to deter editors from re-instating "Majority" and "Minority Leader" as the terms are still be used in the infobox (such as with Lyndon B. Johnson). They should be placed above the office of senator to differentiate them from other senators without overbloating the infobox. If consensus permits, we can even shorten it to "Senate Democratic Leader" and "Senate Republican Leader". I am cautious however - that term is only used informally in press materials.

• Senate Majority and Minority Whip should be combined into the umbrella offices of "Senate Democratic Whip" and "Senate Republican Whip" ( Durbin, Thune) under similar rules as the above. This also applies to whips who rose to become floor leader ( Johnson, Mansfield, Byrd, Reid, McConnell, etc.)
  • This is trickier for the House. Unlike the Senate, where " Democratic whip" and "Republican whip" is easily substituted in place of min-maj titles, the House doesn't have alternative titles when the Minority Leader moves up a level to Speaker in a new majority, with the Minority Whip becoming Majority Leader, so "Leader" and "Whip" become interchangeable. If everything below the Whip-level is removed, Steny Hoyer, Jim Clyburn and Kevin McCarthy's infoboxes are of tolerable length.

• All party leadership positions below the floor leader and whip should be removed but retained in the s-box template, which can better display career progression. These positions are less historically-relevant and can theoretically be created or eliminated quickly. There is almost no inclusion of low-level positions in the infobox, like chief deputy whips ( Merkley, Crapo).
  • This may be true for the Senate, but I'm uncertain about the House. Deputy whips, policy/steering committee chairs can easily be axed as their inclusion in the infobox is inconsistent anyway ( Swalwell is a member of the Dem leadership, but no infobox mention of his position). However, the role of party chair, party vice chair and equally-ranked positions (i.e. Clyburn as Asst. Dem Leader) should be retained for incumbent officeholders ( Aguilar, Lieu, Stefanik, Johnson).
  • The House GOP conference chair has become well-recognised by mainstream audiences after Liz Cheney was replaced by Elise Stefanik in 2021 over January 6, and both remain highly talked-about. I propose that both positions be retained for now, until the consensus ferments long enough that we can remove it from Cheney, a non-incumbent officeholder, without issues.

• All committee chairmanships and ranking memberships, including incumbent ones, should be removed from the infobox but retained in the s-box template, with past and present chairmanships reflected in the "Committee assignments" section ( Dianne Feinstein's section is a model example that includes former chairmanships). Given the controversy surrounding Bob Menendez and the elevation of Ben Cardin to Foreign Relations and Jeanne Shaheen to Small Business, I expect this will face many reversions so this point should feature heavily in the new consensus.

A clear consensus shouldn't be ascertained until enough of users well-acquainted with related articles (ideally not just those who are reverting Feinstein) have joined in. In my view, there's little point forming a consensus on a WikiProject page that seems to attract very little traffic, a consensus that could be misconstrued as a "deal in a smoke-filled room" could be constantly reverted by a silent majority.

While this consensus may apply to all members of Congress, the House is far less affected. With 435 members in total, long-time representatives are more likely to hold only one or two committee leadership positions during their House tenure (GOP turnover rules guarantee that on their end), and "partychiks" destined for leadership rise without having to hold too many high positions ( Jeffries only served as Dem Policy and Communications Committee co-chair and Dem caucus chair before becoming leader).

Exhibit A (merge separate terms, title shortened [Leader])	Exhibit B (merge separate terms, title kept [Leader])	Exhibit C (merge separate terms [Whip])	Exhibit D (current PPT)
Harry Reid Official portrait, 2009 Senate Democratic Leader [a] In office January 3, 2005 – January 3, 2017 Whip Dick Durbin Preceded by Tom Daschle Succeeded by Chuck Schumer Senate Democratic Whip [b] In office January 3, 1999 – January 3, 2005 Leader Tom Daschle Preceded by Wendell Ford Succeeded by Dick Durbin United States Senator from Nevada In office January 3, 1987 – January 3, 2017 Preceded by Paul Laxalt Succeeded by Catherine Cortez Masto Member of the U.S. House of Representatives from Nevada's 1st district In office January 3, 1983 – January 3, 1987 Preceded by James Santini ( at-large) Succeeded by James Bilbray Chair of the Nevada Gaming Commission In office March 27, 1977 – January 5, 1981 Appointed by Mike O'Callaghan Preceded by Peter Echeverria Succeeded by Carl Dodge 25th Lieutenant Governor of Nevada In office January 4, 1971 – January 5, 1975 Governor Mike O'Callaghan Preceded by Edward Fike Succeeded by Robert Rose Member of the Nevada Assembly from the 4th district In office January 6, 1969 – January 4, 1971 Preceded by Edward Fike Succeeded by Robert Rose Personal details Born Harry Mason Reid Jr. (1939-12-02)December 2, 1939 Searchlight, Nevada, U.S. Died December 28, 2021(2021-12-28) (aged 82) Henderson, Nevada, U.S. Political party Democratic Spouse Landra Gould ​ ( m. 1959)​ Children 5, including Rory Alma mater Southern Utah University Utah State University ( BA) George Washington University ( JD) Signature Website Senate website (archived) Harry Reid's voice Harry Reid honors retiring Senator Arlen Specter Recorded December 15, 2010	Mitch McConnell Official portrait, 2016 Leader of the Senate Republican Conference [c] Incumbent Assumed office January 3, 2007 Whip Trent Lott Jon Kyl John Cornyn John Thune Preceded by Bill Frist Senate Republican Whip [d] In office January 3, 2003 – January 3, 2007 Leader Bill Frist Preceded by Don Nickles Succeeded by Trent Lott United States Senator from Kentucky Incumbent Assumed office January 3, 1985 Serving with Rand Paul Preceded by Walter Dee Huddleston Judge/Executive of Jefferson County In office December 1, 1977 – December 21, 1984 Preceded by Todd Hollenbach III Succeeded by Bremer Ehrler United States Assistant Attorney General for the Office of Legislative Affairs Acting In office February 1, 1975 – June 27, 1975 President Gerald Ford Preceded by Vincent Rakestraw Succeeded by Michael Uhlmann Personal details Born Addison Mitchell McConnell III (1942-02-20) February 20, 1942 (age 82) Sheffield, Alabama, U.S. Political party Republican Spouses Sherrill Redmon ​ ​ ( m. 1968; div. 1980)​ Elaine Chao ​ ( m. 1993)​ Children 3 Residence(s) Louisville, Kentucky, U.S. Education University of Louisville ( BA) University of Kentucky ( JD) Signature Website Senate website Military service Allegiance United States Branch/service United States Army Years of service July 9, 1967, to August 15, 1967 (37 days) (medical separation) Unit United States Army Reserve Mitch McConnell's voice Mitch McConnell on Senate bipartisanship in his first speech as Majority Leader Recorded January 7, 2015	Dick Durbin Official portrait, 2022 Senate Democratic Whip [e] Incumbent Assumed office January 3, 2005 Leader Harry Reid Chuck Schumer Preceded by Harry Reid United States Senator from Illinois Incumbent Assumed office January 3, 1997 Serving with Tammy Duckworth Preceded by Paul Simon Member of the U.S. House of Representatives from Illinois's 20th district In office January 3, 1983 – January 3, 1997 Preceded by Paul Findley Succeeded by John Shimkus Personal details Born Richard Joseph Durbin (1944-11-21) November 21, 1944 (age 79) East St. Louis, Illinois, U.S. Political party Democratic Spouse Loretta Schaefer ​ ( m. 1967)​ Children 3 [note 1] Residence(s) Springfield, Illinois, U.S. Education Georgetown University ( BS, JD) Occupation Politician lawyer Signature Website Senate website Dick Durbin's voice Dick Durbin speaks in support of the DREAM Act Recorded December 18, 2010	Patty Murray Official portrait, 2013 President pro tempore of the United States Senate Incumbent Assumed office January 3, 2023 Preceded by Patrick Leahy United States Senator from Washington Incumbent Assumed office January 3, 1993 Serving with Maria Cantwell Preceded by Brock Adams Member of the Washington Senate from the 1st district In office January 9, 1989 – January 3, 1993 Preceded by Bill Kiskaddon Succeeded by Rosemary McAuliffe Personal details Born Patricia Lynn Johns (1950-10-11) October 11, 1950 (age 73) Bothell, Washington, U.S. Political party Democratic Spouse Rob Murray ​ ( m. 1972)​ Children 2 Education Washington State University ( BA) Occupation Politician environmentalist educator Signature File:PattyMurraySignature.png Website Senate website Patty Murray's voice Patty Murray speaks in opposition to legislation that would enact nationwide abortion restrictions Recorded September 14, 2022

Exhibit D (merge of Majority-Minority terms, title shortened [Leader])	Exhibit E (former PPT)	Exhibit F (former PPT)
Trent Lott Senate Republican Leader [f] In office June 12, 1996 – January 3, 2003 Whip Don Nickles Preceded by Bob Dole Succeeded by Bill Frist Senate Republican Whip [g] In office January 3, 2007 – December 18, 2007 Leader Mitch McConnell Preceded by Mitch McConnell Succeeded by Jon Kyl In office January 3, 1995 – June 12, 1996 Leader Bob Dole Preceded by Alan Simpson Succeeded by Don Nickles United States Senator from Mississippi In office January 3, 1989 – December 18, 2007 Preceded by John C. Stennis Succeeded by Roger Wicker House Republican Whip [h] In office January 3, 1981 – January 3, 1989 Leader Robert H. Michel Preceded by Robert H. Michel Succeeded by Dick Cheney Member of the U.S. House of Representatives from Mississippi's 5th district In office January 3, 1973 – January 3, 1989 Preceded by William M. Colmer Succeeded by Larkin I. Smith Personal details Born Chester Trent Lott (1941-10-09) October 9, 1941 (age 82) Grenada, Mississippi, U.S. Political party Republican (1972–present) Other political affiliations Democratic (before 1972) Spouse Patricia Thompson ​ ( m. 1964)​ Children 2 Education University of Mississippi (BPA, JD) Signature Trent Lott's voice Trent Lott speaks on U.S. policy towards Saddam Hussein's Iraq Recorded February 12, 1998	Robert Byrd Official portrait, 2003 President pro tempore of the United States Senate In office January 3, 2007 – June 28, 2010 Preceded by Ted Stevens Succeeded by Daniel Inouye In office June 6, 2001 – January 3, 2003 Preceded by Strom Thurmond Succeeded by Ted Stevens In office January 3, 2001 – January 20, 2001 Preceded by Strom Thurmond Succeeded by Strom Thurmond In office January 3, 1989 – January 3, 1995 Preceded by John C. Stennis Succeeded by Strom Thurmond Chair of the Senate Democratic Caucus [i] In office January 3, 1977 – January 3, 1989 Whip Alan Cranston Preceded by Mike Mansfield Succeeded by George J. Mitchell Senate Democratic Whip [j] In office January 3, 1971 – January 3, 1977 Leader Mike Mansfield Preceded by Ted Kennedy Succeeded by Alan Cranston United States Senator from West Virginia In office January 3, 1959 – June 28, 2010 Preceded by Chapman Revercomb Succeeded by Carte Goodwin Member of the U.S. House of Representatives from West Virginia's 6th district In office January 3, 1953 – January 3, 1959 Preceded by Erland Hedrick Succeeded by John Slack Member of the West Virginia Senate from the 9th district In office December 1, 1950 – December 23, 1952 Preceded by Eugene Scott Succeeded by Jack Nuckols Member of the West Virginia House of Delegates from Raleigh County In office January 1947 – December 1950 Preceded by Multi-member district Succeeded by Multi-member district Personal details Born Cornelius Calvin Sale Jr. (1917-11-20)November 20, 1917 North Wilkesboro, North Carolina, U.S. Died June 28, 2010(2010-06-28) (aged 92) Falls Church, Virginia, U.S. Resting place Columbia Gardens Cemetery Arlington County, Virginia, U.S. Political party Democratic Spouse Erma James ​ ​ ( m. 1936; died 2006)​ Children 2 Education Marshall University ( BA) American University ( JD) Signature Robert Byrd's voice Robert Byrd discusses the Senate's early history during a special bicentennial session Recorded April 6, 1989	Chuck Grassley Official portrait, 2017 United States Senator from Iowa Incumbent Assumed office January 3, 1981 Serving with Joni Ernst Preceded by John Culver President pro tempore of the United States Senate In office January 3, 2019 – January 20, 2021 Preceded by Orrin Hatch Succeeded by Patrick Leahy Member of the U.S. House of Representatives from Iowa's 3rd district In office January 3, 1975 – January 3, 1981 Preceded by H. R. Gross Succeeded by Cooper Evans Member of the Iowa House of Representatives from Butler County In office January 12, 1959 – January 3, 1975 Preceded by Wayne Ballhagen Succeeded by Raymond Lageschulte Constituency 73rd district (1959–1971) 10th district (1971–1973) 37th district (1973–1975) Personal details Born Charles Ernest Grassley (1933-09-17) September 17, 1933 (age 90) New Hartford, Iowa, U.S. Political party Republican Spouse Barbara Speicher ​ ( m. 1954)​ Children 5 Relatives Pat Grassley (grandson) Education University of Northern Iowa ( BA, MA) Signature Website Senate website Chuck Grassley's voice Chuck Grassley on his support for confirming John Roberts as chief justice of the United States Recorded September 28, 2005

Efns

References

SuperWIKI ( talk) 06:01, 4 October 2023 (UTC) reply

Krisgabwoosh, Enos733, whose comments were referenced in my response. SuperWIKI ( talk) 06:05, 4 October 2023 (UTC) reply

I agree that in comparison to committee assignments, axing party political positions is comparatively more difficult – individuals like Reid or McConnell are definitely known by their status as caucus leaders. I honestly wouldn't even mind going the Richard Shelby route for both party and committee slots, if only the lack of mobile functionality weren't an impediment.

Moving committee positions to their own section in prose is something I already expressed my view on. Giving party positions their own section there isn't an issue either (Something like: Party leadership positions > Committee assignments > Caucus memberships). These would contain just the positions and years, leaving befores and afters to succession boxes further below.

I'd also like to bring up the idea that portraying certain positions while one is the incumbent is markedly different from once they're out of office. McConnell and the now-deceased Reid may be popularly known by their party positions today, but does Oscar Underwood necessarily merit "Senate Minority Leader" in his infobox a century later? These can be revisited as we reconsider them. For newer congressmen rising through the ranks, adding and removing party positions as they scale them doesn't seem unreasonable. Kevin McCarthy's status as minority leader of the California Assembly may have been relevant to show at the top of his infobox when he was the incumbent, but could easily be excluded now that he had exercised far higher positions. Krisgabwoosh ( talk) 07:13, 4 October 2023 (UTC) reply

Comment: I agree with you on the dubious importance for Underwood, but for different reasons. The majority and minority leaders were far less powerful back in their beginnings. Back then, individual senators, informal factions and committee chairmen were the kings of the Senate. Prior to Henry Cabot Lodge's appointment as the first official Majority Leader in 1918 (Underwood for the Dems in 1923, and the first formally acknowledged by the Senate), the chairmen of the Democratic and Republican party groups served largely for coordination and organisation, and rarely commanded respect.

Factions like the isolationists after World War I and the Southern Democrats in the 1940s–60s on civil rights, heavily curtailed the powers of their party leaders. Robert A. Taft, a prominent anti-interventionist who opposed the creation of NATO, was the major Republican power in the Senate in the late 1940s to early 50s, and made life hellish for the more internationalist President Eisenhower. He never served as leader of the GOP conference until January 1953 (he died in July), but exercised actual power as chair of the technically-subordinate Senate Republican Policy Committee from 1947.

Lyndon B. Johnson was the first floor leader to successfully exert power (usually quite aggressively) such as on forcing through the Civil Rights Act of 1957 amidst reluctant fellow Southern Democrats, and formed the basis of the Majority Leader as we know it today. The point is, an office's importance changes over time, so care has to be taken. Underwood's infobox doesn't seem problematically massive. SuperWIKI ( talk) 09:36, 4 October 2023 (UTC) reply

Just wanted to note, I added the EFNS and Refs. SuperWIKI ( talk) 07:31, 4 October 2023 (UTC) reply

I like what you put together. A couple comments. I think we do not need to elevate the whip position(s) to the infobox. I also think that we should not make judgments of when a current party position becomes more important - so readers could trace the position back (or forward) - without an editorial judgment of well, it wasn't important in 1850, but the position did exist. - Enos733 ( talk) 03:57, 5 October 2023 (UTC) reply

I believe the idea is that anything removed from the infobox should still be accessible and navigable through succession boxes at the bottom. Krisgabwoosh ( talk) 04:16, 5 October 2023 (UTC) reply

I have a fuller response but I'll split my points as more responses come up. In the meantime, I request clarification on what you said about "editorial judgement". If it was critical, I did not mean to be subjective. What I shared about the majority leader's history was from Robert Caro's book LBJ: Master of the Senate. I apologise if I'm not understanding your point.

This is exactly why I felt the need clarification on the problem in the beginning. Is our main gripe simply about infobox bloat, or that it violates the spirit of WP:INFOBOX. If it's the former, simple. We trim down the infoboxes of the top 10% of senators with overlong careers. I can easily create a short list of articles we can do preliminary edits on, assuming we reach a definitive consensus. If it's the latter, we have to trim on a much wider scale, even for senators with much shorter careers ( Bill Frist, for instance) to maintain consistency.

I fear that this may be a bit of a stagnant debate on this page. Is there anywhere on Wikipedia where more, varied responses from interested parties could be gathered? I'm not exactly sure this page is attracting the traffic needed to form a consensus that won't be reverted if we implement it on all senators, if we take the WP:INFOBOX policy violation as the main issue. SuperWIKI ( talk) 14:39, 5 October 2023 (UTC) reply

Shorten chairmanships but leave party leadership & maj/minority

Hi all, I'm a fairly low-level British and US federal politics editor but have a thought on this. I'm of the view that we should shorten chairmanships and ranking memberships (like the one in Theresa May's infobox of her shadow portfolios. This way it would be shortened but still available to see what significant positions and committees the senator/representative was influential on.

Party leadership should be well advertised in my opinion. For example, Harry Reid is known for his role as a former Senate Majority Leader more so than his position as a Senator from Nevada. This leadership is important and often defines their legacy – it is therefore important if they are in majority/minority as to what work they carried out. I do feel these are important and should be included in the infobox in their entirety.

President pro tempore of the United States Senate is a constitutional position so should be included in all infoboxes of people who held it, just as the Speaker of the House is and should be. They are both in the line of succession so this is of particularly important interest. PPT emeritus is a significant position that has been actively created by the senate to recognise long serving members however it is negotiable as to how important it truly is.

Thanks for your response! Wondering what your position is on lower level party positions, especially the Majority and Minority Whips, House Majority Leader. SuperWIKI ( talk) 11:48, 14 February 2024 (UTC) reply

Hi editors, I am seeking opinions on this request to update a small section of the biography of political commentator Steve Hilton about the 2020 U.S. election. The Wikipedia article says "Hilton promoted Trump's false claims of large-scale fraud," but the source material does not support the claim that Hilton promoted Trump's views. It quotes him only as saying that "evidence of fraud or irregularity should be brought forward and the court should adjudicate." There is a difference between "promoting" fraud claims and saying that claims should be investigated, and the Wikipedia article should faithfully represent the source material per Wikipedia:Verifiability. I have a conflict of interest, as I am here on behalf of Steve Hilton, which is why I have not edited the article directly myself. Thank you for considering. SKflo ( talk) 18:05, 2 October 2023 (UTC) reply

Hello,

I'm an employee at Global Strategy Group, which does lots of polling, research, and strategic work for Democratic lawmakers. Last week, I made an edit request that proposes several updates to the GSG article's New York State section, which covers the firm's work for various New York Democrats, including Kathy Hochul and Kirsten Gillibrand. Would anyone here be interested in reviewing that request? I'll put a link here. It's a rather dense request, so I appreciate whoever takes the time to work through it. Please leave feedback, if you think certain aspects of it aren't up to par. I'm happy to collaborate with independent editors to further improve the changes I've put forward.

Thanks, ES at Global Strategy Group ( talk) 14:14, 22 November 2023 (UTC) reply

McCarthyism has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 ( talk) 22:07, 26 December 2023 (UTC) reply
Cite error: There are <ref group=note> tags on this page, but the references will not show without a {{reflist|group=note}} template (see the help page).