Murtha>Hoyer

[southsider2k5]

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=206...&refer=home

 

Pelosi Supports Murtha for Majority Leader Over Hoyer (Update3)

 

By Jay Newton-Small and Laura Litvan

 

Nov. 13 (Bloomberg) -- House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi said she supports Representative John Murtha for the post of majority leader, bypassing the current No. 2, Steny Hoyer.

 

``For all you have done for Democrats in the past and especially this last year, I am pleased to support your candidacy for majority leader for the 110th Congress,'' Pelosi wrote in a letter to Murtha, a Pennsylvania Democrat, released yesterday.

 

Murtha, 73, last year called for the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq, a move that Pelosi in her letter said ``changed the national debate'' and made Iraq a central issue in the Nov. 7 midterm elections. He is close to Pelosi, 66, a California Democrat who is in line to become speaker when her party takes control of the House in January.

 

Pelosi's move poses potential risks for Pelosi if Democrats fail to align with her, said Tom Mann, a congressional scholar at the Brookings Institution, a public policy research organization in Washington.

 

``The betting has been that Hoyer is way ahead and that Pelosi would stay out of it,'' Mann said.

 

House Democrats plan to elect their leaders for the new Congress on Nov. 16.

 

``If it's widely assumed she's trying to alter the outcome, then it hurts her,'' Mann said. ``If the word inside is that she's just showing loyalty but is fully prepared to accept the decision of the Democratic caucus, then it will pass quickly.''

 

`Very Close'

 

Hoyer, currently the No. 2 House Democrat, said he had known for some time of Pelosi's choice to support Murtha. ``I respect her decision as the two are very close,'' Hoyer, a Maryland Democrat, said in a statement.

 

``I am grateful for the support I have from my colleagues, and have the majority of the caucus supporting me,'' said Hoyer, 67. ``I look forward to working with Speaker Pelosi as majority leader.''

 

Representative Dennis Cardoza, a California Democrat who supports Hoyer, said Pelosi's endorsement will be seen as evidence of her loyalty to Murtha, not an effort to interject her views into the race. Members knew that Pelosi would probably personally support Murtha when they gave commitments to Hoyer in recent months, he said.

 

``I don't think it's going to have an impact on people's decisions,'' Cardoza said in an interview. ``She's being loyal, and members have personal relationships.''

 

Cardoza said that Hoyer's travels to 39 House districts in the month leading up to the Nov. 7 elections boosted his support. Hoyer has the backing of 28 incoming House members, he said.

 

Competition With Pelosi

 

Hoyer rose in 2002 to become Democratic whip when Pelosi moved up to the leader's post. The previous year, Hoyer lost a contest to Pelosi for the whip's job. The whip job, which entails vote counting and unifying the caucus on legislation, is the No. 2 minority slot and the No. 3 majority post behind speaker and majority leader.

 

Murtha, in a statement today, welcomed Pelosi's backing.

 

``I am deeply gratified to receive the support of Speaker Pelosi, a tireless advocate for change and a true leader for our party and our country,'' Murtha said. ``Last Tuesday, the American people spoke and the message could not be clearer: We need a new direction.''

 

Murtha is an ``anti-abortion, Catholic, and pro-hunting'' Democrat, said Stephen Schneck, the chairman of the politics department at Catholic University in Washington.

 

``This is the direction in the Democratic Party that did so well in fall elections,'' Schneck said.

 

To contact the reporter on this story: Jay Newton-Small in Washington at [email protected] ; Laura Litvan at [email protected]

[Rex Kickass]

Prediction: Hoyer wins Majority Leader post. Handily.

[kapkomet]

Prediction: Hoyer wins Majority Leader post. Handily.

It's the smart move (Hoyer), but Nancy is showing her true colors, already.

[NorthSideSox72]

I think the Hoyer v Murtha thing will be a way to see how the Dems plan to attack the Iraq situation - rapid withdrawal (Murtha) or something more gradual and orderly (Hoyer).

[kapkomet]

What the Dems want (at least the hard-left) is Murtha.

 

What should happen is Hoyer, for many reasons.

[Balta1701]

It's the smart move (Hoyer), but Nancy is showing her true colors, already.

Murtha is actually quite a bit more Conservative than Hoyer on most issues, aside from the Iraq war.

 

This is almost certainly much more a result of the fact that Hoyer and Pelosi were quite bitter rivals, with Pelosi winning, during the vote for the Democratic Whip position in 2001, which after Gephardt lost again put Pelosi on the pathway to the speakership. They've been rivals for quite a few positions while in the minority as well, which has only deepened the divide between them.

 

Hoyer's opponent would probably have to be Zell Miller before Pelosi would support Hoyer.

[NorthSideSox72]

What the Dems want (at least the hard-left) is Murtha.

 

What should happen is Hoyer, for many reasons.

Let's wait and see. This is one of the handful of decisions that I'd call leading indicators of where the party wants to go (along with some of the legislation that Pelosi discussed).

[Balta1701]

What the Dems want (at least the hard-left) is Murtha.

 

What should happen is Hoyer, for many reasons.

Murtha's congressional vote scorecards from interest groups in the last few years as they've been issued.

 

LIBERAL-MINDED GROUPS

0% - NARAL (pro-choice group)

0% - Planned Parenthood

34% - Humane Society

44% - ACLU

45% - US PIRG

56% - League of Conservation Voters

33% to 17% to 63% over 3 years - Human Rights Campaign (gay civil rights)

74% - NAACP

78% - Children's Defense Fund

96% - Leadership Conference on Civil Rights

100% - National Education Association (they're a good education group)

 

CONSERVATIVE-MINDED GROUPS

28% - Focus on the Family, Family Research Council (religious right)

50% - John Birch Society (insanely conservative)

50% - Eagle Forum (Phyllis Schlafly)

53% - Christian Coalition (religious right)

70% - National Right to Life (anti-choice)

92% - National Rifle Association

Edited November 13, 2006 by Balta1701

[Balta1701]

By the way, after some thought while at the gym, I'd like to add that I really don't like either of them for this position.

[Rex Kickass]

You would be correct. Steny Hoyer - although having more support with Blue Dogs than you would think, is actually the far more liberal majority leader. John Murtha is a centrist, by definition. Although bringing Murtha in is more of a personal relationship thing rather than an ideological battle, bringing Murtha in - ultimately - would be more of a pull to the center by the Democratic party.

 

BTW: it should be noted that putting Murtha in the position of Majority Leader will not necessarily change anything in the way that Iraq is handled. But if you are going to put someone in a position of influence over war efforts, someone with actual combat experience - that's not a bad thing to have.

 

In my opinion, I'm not a fan of Hoyer or Murtha. Frankly, I think that they are part of the problem in D.C. generally, and I hope for some sort of conversion over to more responsibility with what they do as Majority Leader fiscally, but I'm not holding my breath.

[Texsox]

Murtha's congressional vote scorecards from interest groups in the last few years as they've been issued.

 

I'm guessing my voting record would be pretty close to his.

[Balta1701]

In my opinion, I'm not a fan of Hoyer or Murtha. Frankly, I think that they are part of the problem in D.C. generally, and I hope for some sort of conversion over to more responsibility with what they do as Majority Leader fiscally, but I'm not holding my breath.

Exactly my point in saying I don't like either of them. Murtha's one of the classic pork-guys, who brings lots of dollars to his district, and who has casually benefited from a few of those deals. Hoyer's one of the Republican-lite lobbyist friends, who's big in with things like banking, etc. He was really big in helping get the bankruptcy bill/credit card company bailout bill passed a year ago.

[EvilMonkey]

Exactly my point in saying I don't like either of them. Murtha's one of the classic pork-guys, who brings lots of dollars to his district, and who has casually benefited from a few of those deals. Hoyer's one of the Republican-lite lobbyist friends, who's big in with things like banking, etc. He was really big in helping get the bankruptcy bill/credit card company bailout bill passed a year ago.

If murtha is 'casually', then Hastert is 'incidentally'.

Edited November 14, 2006 by EvilMonkey

[mr_genius]

CONSERVATIVE-MINDED GROUPS

28% - Focus on the Family, Family Research Council (religious right)

50% - John Birch Society (insanely conservative)

70% - National Right to Life (anti-choice)

 

haha, nice descriptions, project "Smart Vote"

[Texsox]

haha, nice descriptions, project "Smart Vote"

 

I noticed the same thing.

[Balta1701]

haha, nice descriptions, project "Smart Vote"

So if you actually follow the link, you'll see that I just culled the recent years/descriptions from another page that summed up the recent rankings for Murtha, and in fact that page as far as I can tell is only presenting the data. There are A LOT more rankings at that page than what I posted.

[mr_genius]

So if you actually follow the link, you'll see that I just culled the recent years/descriptions from another page that summed up the recent rankings for Murtha, and in fact that page as far as I can tell is only presenting the data. There are A LOT more rankings at that page than what I posted.

 

 

i was commenting on the descriptions you posted.

 

 

 

on another note, so much for ending the "culture of corruption"

 

http://www.citizensforethics.org/activities/murtha.html

Edited November 14, 2006 by mr_genius

[Balta1701]

i was commenting on the descriptions you posted.

on another note, so much for ending the "culture of corruption"

 

http://www.citizensforethics.org/activities/murtha.html

Exactly the point I raised earlier. I only wish I felt like Hoyer was better. I don't. Murtha and Hoyer both make my list for different reasons, but I still don't think either of them are that clean. I really wish someone else was in the running.

[southsider2k5]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...6111300722.html

 

Pelosi's anti-corruption statements are really coming into question with her backing of Murtha.

 

In Backing Murtha, Pelosi Draws Fire

Her Ethics Vow Is Questioned

 

By Jonathan Weisman

Washington Post Staff Writer

Tuesday, November 14, 2006; Page A01

 

House Speaker-designate Nancy Pelosi's endorsement of Rep. John P. Murtha's bid for House majority leader set off a furor yesterday on Capitol Hill, with critics charging that she is undercutting her pledge to clean up corruption by backing a veteran lawmaker who they say has repeatedly skirted ethical boundaries.

 

Pelosi (D-Calif.) directly intervened in the heated contest between Murtha (D-Pa.) and House Minority Whip Steny H. Hoyer (D-Md.) on Sunday by circulating a letter to Democratic lawmakers. The letter voiced her support for Murtha and put her prestige on the line in a closely fought leadership battle. Some Democratic lawmakers and watchdog groups say they are baffled that Pelosi would go out of her way to back Murtha's candidacy after pledging to make the new 110th Congress the most ethical and corruption-free in history.

 

Murtha, a longtime senior Democrat on the House Appropriations Committee, has battled accusations over the years that he has traded federal spending for campaign contributions, that he has abused his post as ranking party member on the Appropriations defense subcommittee, and that he has stood in the way of ethics investigations. Those charges come on top of Murtha's involvement 26 years ago in the FBI's Abscam bribery sting.

 

"Pelosi's endorsement suggests to me she was interested in the culture of corruption only as a campaign issue and has no real interest in true reform," said Melanie Sloan, executive director of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), a Democratic-leaning group. "It is shocking to me that someone with [Murtha's] ethics problems could be number two in the House leadership."

 

"People have known about these things for months," said one Democratic House member who spoke on the condition of anonymity because he did not want to anger the presumed incoming speaker. "I am sure they are going to become much more important in the next few days."

 

Andrew Koneschusky, a spokesman for Murtha, declined to discuss ethics issues, saying: "We are focused on the future. We are focused on electing the best candidate to lead our party and deliver the change the American people want, and that is Jack Murtha. We are looking forward, not backward."

 

Pelosi said in her letter that she was swayed to endorse Murtha, a longtime ally, by his early call for a withdrawal of U.S. forces from Iraq. Pelosi aides and Murtha supporters said the charges against him are trivial or untrue. A senior Pelosi aide conceded that her endorsement is risky but said that she had to show her loyalty to Murtha, who has been steadfastly loyal to her.

 

As for the ethics issue, "there's no substance to it," said Rep. Linda T. Sanchez (D-Calif.), a strong supporter of Murtha.

 

At issue is Murtha's relationships with two defense lobbyists. Paul Magliocchetti of the PMA Group is a former aide to the lawmaker, and Robert "Kit" Murtha is his brother and was a senior partner at KSA Consulting from 2002 to 2005.

 

The PMA Group has become the go-to firm to approach Murtha as ranking Democrat on the Appropriations defense subcommittee, CREW charges. In the 2006 defense appropriations bill, PMA clients reaped at least 60 special provisions, or "earmarks," worth more than $95 million.

 

The PMA Group and its clients have been top campaign contributors for Murtha: $274,649 in the 2006 campaign cycle, $236,799 in the 2004 cycle and $279,074 in the 2002 cycle, according to CREW's tallies.

 

After Kit Murtha joined KSA Consulting in 2002, one of his first clients was a wireless networking company called Aeptec Microsystems Inc., which was seeking to build a business complex in Murtha's district with a Pennsylvania state grant. Aeptec executive Michael Hoban contributed $2,000 to Murtha's campaign that year.

In 2004, Murtha helped secure the grant. A few months later, the Appropriations subcommittee approved a $4.2 million earmark for the company.

 

Murtha may be the Democratic Party's consummate dealer in home-district spending. Taxpayers for Common Sense identified more than $103 million in earmarks in the 2006 defense spending bill that Murtha requested for his home district in southwestern Pennsylvania -- nearly $80 million of which cleared President Bush's desk.

 

"Hoyer gains his influence the 'regular' way," said Steve Ellis of Taxpayers for Common Sense. "He travels, and he raises money for his leadership [political action committee], which doles it out to help Democrats get elected. Murtha doesn't bother with that nicety. For years, he has used his powerful perch as the ranking Democrat on the defense appropriations subcommittee to dole out earmarks to build influence. Hoyer raises campaign cash; Murtha taps the taxpayer for influence."

 

Former congressman Chris Bell (D-Tex.) said yesterday that Murtha helped elevate Rep. Alan B. Mollohan (W.Va.) to the top Democratic spot on the House ethics committee, and that Murtha and Mollohan have worked to slow the ethics process to a crawl for much of the past two years.

 

As for the Abscam case, Murtha was not indicted and his conduct was cleared by the House ethics committee, but he did meet with FBI agents posing as Arab sheiks and, after refusing bribes on several occasions, appeared to leave open the possibility of doing business later. Hoyer has been criticized as well for his legislative dealings, especially for his close ties to lobbyists and business interests. But it is Murtha's record that Pelosi will have to defend, watchdog groups said yesterday.

 

Rep. Michael E. Capuano (D-Mass.), a Murtha supporter, said he was not aware of the ethical issues around the lawmaker, but said they will have little impact on Democrats as they gather Thursday to choose the next majority leader.

 

"The bottom line is, Nancy has decided what team she wants," Capuano said. "What members have to ask themselves is whether they want a unified leadership team or a fractured leadership team. That will make a difference in the next two years."

 

Hoyer and Pelosi have had a strained relationship since Hoyer competed with her in 2001 for the post of minority whip; Murtha managed her winning campaign. The urge to stay loyal to the presumed new Democratic speaker -- as well as to curry favor to obtain committee assignments -- will bring a substantial number of votes to Murtha, one of his supporters said.

 

Hoyer supporters continue to say he has more than enough votes to prevail, regardless of Pelosi's wishes. Rep. David E. Price (D-N.C.) said Pelosi timed her endorsement to come out after the votes were solidified, giving a nod to Murtha for the sake of loyalty but doing little to sway the election.

 

"This race is already a done deal," agreed Rep. Jim Matheson (D-Utah).

 

In the Senate, Democrats will elect new leaders today and Republicans will follow tomorrow. The top two Democratic leadership positions are set. Harry M. Reid (Nev.) will remain as party leader and Richard J. Durbin (Ill.) will remain as whip, but this time they will be in the majority, not the minority. A change is possible at the No. 3 slot, conference secretary. Sen. Debbie Stabenow (Mich.) holds that position, but Senate sources said she may surrender it for a seat on the Finance Committee.

 

It was unclear who would succeed her, but Senate aides said it probably would be another woman. Charles E. Schumer (N.Y.) will remain chairman of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee.

 

Among Republicans, Mitch McConnell (Ky.) is set to become Senate minority leader, moving into the vacancy left by the retiring Bill Frist (Tenn.). There could be a contest between two Southerners seeking to succeed McConnell as party whip. Senate insiders said Lamar Alexander (Tenn.) appears to have enough votes, but former majority leader Trent Lott (Miss.) was still seeking support yesterday.

 

Sen. Jon Kyl (Ariz.) is in line for the No. 3 post of Republican Conference chairman, now held by Rick Santorum (Pa.), who lost last week. Sen. John Ensign (Nev.) has agreed to chair the party's campaign committee, succeeding Elizabeth Dole (N.C.) after a disappointing election for the GOP.

 

Staff writer Charles Babington contributed to this report.

[kapkomet]

And she should. Murtha is just exactly what they were "trying to get rid of in Washington".

[Balta1701]

And she should. Murtha is just exactly what they were "trying to get rid of in Washington".

The only problem, like I keep saying, is that Hoyer just isn't that much better at all. He's your classic "get as much money as you can from lobbyists" type Democrat, which to my eyes, is basically just as bad.

 

Perhaps more disturbing to my eyes is the fact that it also seems Jane Harman is going to lose her position as chair of the House Intelligence committee to a person who, while working as a judge, was impeached for taking a $150k bribe.

 

TPMCafe-goers know Jane Harman from her guest posts here, including from her trip to Iraq in the fall of 2005. And, we will be hearing much more about her in the coming days as Nancy Pelosi decides whether to make Harman -- the ranking Democrat on the House Select Committee on Intelligence -- that body's chairwoman.

 

In many ways, this choice is bigger than the choice Pelosi made in the majority leader contest between John Murtha and Steny Hoyer. Backing Murtha -- but not putting on the full press for him -- can be understood as kind payback for her friend, former campaign manager, and mentor. But in light of the Murtha endorsement -- one in which Pelosi is being increasingly criticized for backing a man who was an "unindicted co-conspirator" during the ABSCAM investigation in the 1980's, has mastered the art of earmarking, and opposed the raft of ethics reforms Democrats proposed in the wake of Abramoff -- the choice for Intel Committee chair is even more important.

 

One time can be excused. Two times is a trend. And considering that the likely replacement for Harman is Alcee Hastings, a former federal judge who was impeached by an overwhelming vote of a Democratically-controlled House and Senate for taking a $150,000 bribe, Pelosi has to get this right.

 

The optics of backing Hastings over the eminently qualified Harman are horrendous: Democrats elected to clean up Washington, and the only senior member passed over for a chairmanship is pushed aside for an impeached judge. Democrats need to prove their security credentials, and they appoint a chairman of the Intel Committee who would not pass a background check if he applied for the most junior analyst post at the CIA. What's worse -- as the Washington Post descibed Pelosi's move -- is that it's "a decision pregnant with personal animus." Message: settling of scores is more important than your security.

 

To that, I'd add: wouldn't it be nice if the first woman Speaker had a woman chairing not just a major committee, but a national security-related one?

 

Politics aside, passing over Harman would be a huge blow to a committee that needs someone leading it with deep experience in, knowledge of, and outrage about the doings of the past six years. And, as one extremely senior Democratic foreign policy hand put it to me last night, there is no one in the entire Caucus with more experience and credibility on intel matters than Harman.

[Rex Kickass]

I'm not happy with what they've done in the past. But before I condemn them as being ineffective as a majority leader, I want to see what they do as a majority.

[kapkomet]

I'm not happy with what they've done in the past. But before I condemn them as being ineffective as a majority leader, I want to see what they do as a majority.

Why would it change, Rex? There's simply no reason to think anything will change.

[Balta1701]

Why would it change, Rex? There's simply no reason to think anything will change.

In other words...if something does change, be excited and let them have your vote next time it comes around.

 

If not, then we'll see if the other side has any better options.

 

Eventually, some party is going to be stupid enough to realize that they can win a bunch of elections by actually changing the culture of lobbyists and pork in Congress, because the people are sick of it. At least, that will be my hope.

[kapkomet]

In other words...if something does change, be excited and let them have your vote next time it comes around.

 

If not, then we'll see if the other side has any better options.

 

Eventually, some party is going to be stupid enough to realize that they can win a bunch of elections by actually changing the culture of lobbyists and pork in Congress, because the people are sick of it. At least, that will be my hope.

Now that much we can agree on. But don't hold your breath, because they are all enamoured by the power.