Senate Republican leaders look longingly at the power of their Democratic counterparts and wonder why they rely on a seniority system for selecting committee members and chairmen when giving their leader appointment authority would do so much more to enforce party discipline. This is akin to asking themselves why they are in the majority at all.

Certainly one of the reasons they are is that Democrats during the last two decades have spent an inordinate amount of time talking to and serving voters who do not represent a majority. Litmus tests became as common as donkey stickers at Democratic gatherings, and voters, tired of being told they did not measure up, went elsewhere. Only now do Democrats seem to have realized the inevitable result and have responded: News stories these days are full of amazement that many in the party are supporting John Kerry even though he does[n’t] match their views on every issue. Polls regularly show Mr. Kerry slightly ahead of the president.

Now it may be the Republicans’ turn to chop away at their majority. The reason behind wanting to give Majority Leader Bill Frist more power over committee assignments is clear. He could, as Roll Call pointed out recently, “reward loyal senators and punish wayward Republicans who fail to toe the party line.” Which GOP chairmen might find others sitting in their seats as a result of this rules re-write? To begin, it might be those who failed to go along with the GOP on the latest budget – that would be Sen. John McCain (Commerce, Science and Transportation), Sen. Susan Collins (Governmental Affairs) and Sen. Olympia Snowe (Small Business). After them, it could be anyone else not as conservative as the party’s leadership.

That would provide satisfaction to Republicans who are frustrated that they finally achieved the trifecta of power – White House, Senate, House – and they still can’t pass a budget. But the GOP should weigh that satisfaction against the need to protect and promote its less-conservative senators. They can demonstrate this need to themselves by asking two simple questions: Do they want moderate voters to support them? Why should moderate voters support a party that punishes moderate senators? If they would like to do a little research before answering these questions, they would find that people who identify themselves as moderates make up a significant percent of voters; among young adults, 30 percent say they are moderates.

Sen. Susan Collins is a member of an ad hoc GOP group reviewing the committee-assignment rules and plans to oppose any change to them. She has state concerns – she would like committee assignments that reflect the needs of the state – and institutional concerns. The Senate, she says, always has been a place where “each of the 100 members gets to play a considerable role, and that has served us well. The proposed changes would potentially impede a senator’s ability to represent his or her constituents without fear of retribution.”

Voters would likely respond to that, and soon Democrats could worry about the powers of the Senate’s majority leader.