Monday, November 13, 2006

Pelosi Endorses Murtha

Speaker-to-be Nancy Pelosi has backed John Murtha to be the next Majority leader. Last month Adam explained why we at TWM aren't as eager to embrace him:

...it appears Murtha is a politician of the old school, doling out favors and putting the squeeze on reluctant members of his own party with the power of the purse. I don't mind that Murtha is a conservative Democrat for the most part, but how can we successfully argue that Republicans have corrupted Congress and that we will deliver real reform when our own prominent members behave this way? Pelosi has promised as Speaker she would work to reduce earmarks (she says she believes they should be eliminated entirely, which I agree with), but how could she do so with a Majority Leader who opposes any reform?


Those objections are even more relevant than they were when Adam wrote them at the beginning of October. Quite simply, Murtha is the wrong choice.

6 comments:

adam said...

Well, though I stand by my post on Murtha, I think Pelosi has a genuine interest in trying to keep the Democratic caucus united, which is key to us getting anything important done obviously. Especially if Hoyer is a threat to Democratic unity on Iraq, I'd be willing to reluctantly back Murtha despite his stance on lobbying reform and pork. I've also heard from some that his position as Majority Leader might better contain these ethical lapses as otherwise he'd be chair of the Defense Appropriations subcommittee.

Xanthippas said...

What? You've reconsidered your opinion in light of changed facts and circumstances?

Liberal flip-flopper!

Nat-Wu said...

Yeah, but once in that seat, we only need Murtha as long as Iraq is an issue, or rather, as long as Iraq outweighs reform in importance to the voters. Then he becomes more a hindrance than a help, and can we really push him out after he's established?

adam said...

That's a fair point, but from what I'm hearing, Steny Hoyer may not be so much better on the ethics issues. Might as well have the guy with the strongest presence...

Xanthippas said...

I was saying on another blog, that I kind of wished we had someone who had a stronger voice on ethics and lobbying reform and the corruption issue in general. It seems odd to me that in an election that was defined not only by iraq but by corruption, we get two guys who appear to be from the "business as usual" wing of the Democratic party.

Nat-Wu said...

Hey, I'm not by default going to support the Democrats. If they can't do better than that, they don't deserve to stay in power.