Talk:Hill committee

Latest comment: 14 years ago by Born2cycle in topic Untitled

Untitled

edit
The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Not moved. No consensus to move at all, much less where to move. Born2cycle (talk) 05:07, 14 October 2010 (UTC)Reply


Requested move

edit

Hill committeeTo be determined — The current name seems to be a Wikipedia neologism. I believe that a different name is needed, but I'm not sure what that name should be. --Orlady (talk) 03:10, 27 September 2010 (UTC)Reply

Note: This proposal will also affect Category:Hill Committees.

Contrary to the article lead that says it is a "common name for the political party committees that work to elect members of their own party to United States Congress," it appears to me that the term "Hill committee" is a WP:Neologism. I have searched, but I can't find any evidence that this term has ever been used by a reliable source. I do, however, see merit in retaining a category, and possibly also an article, for the Congressional campaign committees formed by political parties in the United States.

I think a new name is needed, but don't have a strong opinion on the "correct" name. I have found little evidence of a standard "generic" noun for these committees. I nominate "national party campaign committee" and "party congressional campaign committee", both of which would distinguish these committees from the parties' national committees. The U.S. Senate website calls the Senate-side committees "Senatorial campaign committees"[1]. This 1999 article in Legislative Studies Quarterly uses the term "party campaign committee." This 2005 Washington Monthly article calls them "party campaign committees" or just "party committees." This treatise about U.S. campaign finance law mostly refers to the parties' "congressional campaign committees" or to "House campaign committees" and "Senate campaign committees." (I think this article's nomenclature is particularly relevant, since the nuances of campaign finance law led to the creation of these committees.) In this article, CQpolitics mostly avoided using a generic noun, but made one reference to "Senate campaign committees." On this America.gov page, I found reference to "party campaign committees in both the Senate and House of Representatives." This article in The Hill mainly calls the committees by their names, but it refers once to "the Democratic campaign committees." A George Washington University Law School handout giving advice to Capitol Hill job-seekers refers (on the very last page) to these groups as "campaign committees": [2]. This glossary of terms related to one state's state-specific campaign laws refers to "Legislative campaign committees."

I've looked at a lot of online sources that discuss these committees but don't use a generic term for them, such as Talking Points Memo, Mother Jones, and American Prospect.

This NY Daily News article got me excited because it uses the term "Hill committee", but that usage turns out to be part of a snippet of content from Wikipedia: [3] --Orlady (talk) 03:10, 27 September 2010 (UTC)Reply

  • I believe Congressional campaign committee is the common name for these committees. Powers T 23:15, 27 September 2010 (UTC)Reply
  • "Hill committees" in Google Books yields some results that prove the term does, in fact, exist outside of Wikipedia: [4], [5]. "Congressional campaign committee" has the problem that both of the House committees are called "congressional", while the Senate committees are not. Ucucha 22:49, 28 September 2010 (UTC)Reply
    • Oppose on further review, since alternatives proposed here are ambiguous or unwieldy: see here for references to state committees as "campaign committees" and "legislative campaign committees", and here for a reference that contrast "congressional" with "senatorial" campaign committees. "Hill committee" is concise and has no confounding closely related meanings, and is not a neologism. However, we should consider moving to "Hill committees", since the committees are apparently usually referred to collectively. Ucucha 22:55, 28 September 2010 (UTC)Reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.