This seems to be a hideous idea:
The unexpected move signaled the sizable value Pelosi gives to personal loyalty and personality preferences. Hoyer competed with her in 2001 for the post of House minority whip, while Murtha managed her winning campaign. Pelosi has also all but decided she will not name the ranking Democrat on the House intelligence committee, Rep. Jane Harman (D-Calif.) to chair that panel next year, a decision pregnant with personal animus.
Rather than screaming about the Alcee Hastings corruption conviction, I will offer you this challenge:
Make the case that Hastings SHOULD be the new chair of the House Intelligence Committee.
Good luck with that.
(I should add I am really eager to pull the trigger on a “Democratic Stupidity” tag here, but since the decision has not been made yet, I will hold off and put this under “Politics.” We don’t know how she will appoint, yet, and this may just be more of the usual nonsense in the media.)
Steve
It’s entirely about seniority. Harman had her seniority restored following a two-year break from Congress, a decision that ruffled some feathers. By traditional rules, Hastings should be considered senior to Harman, it’s as simple as that.
I’ve also seen the name of Texas Congressman Silvestre Reyes floated for this chair, which might work out as a compromise.
Hastings is an embarassment and the existence of this issue is an embarassment. I blame the Congress that could have, but didn’t, barred him from seeking further federal office at the time he was impeached. How did he beat the rap in his bribery trial, anyhow?
The Other Steve
I haven’t seen anyone suggesting that. All of the Democratic blogs I follow say it would be a very bad idea.
Richard Bottoms
There are no bad Democrats, but there are some stupid ones. I don’t think Pelosi is stupid and thus Hastings will not get the post.
What I think is happening is Pelosi is letting the press do her job for her. By letting a hint that Hastings might get the nod leak out Hastings’ corruption tainted past hits the airwaves and blunts any criticism by the Congressional Black Caucus for not going with him. Harman on the other hand is put on notice that she needs to be sharper in her criticism of the White House.
Harman gets the job.
ThymeZone
Must be a slow news day.
Washington politics as usual. This is the way things work in real political institutions. Unless a law is being broken, the Constitution being trashed, or the country being sold down the river to lobbyists, I really don’t care about the games these people play with each other. It’s the way things work, whether it’s Dem or GOP stuff. Hell, it’s the way things work everywhere.
Punchy
She didn’t exactly go Liebs on the Dems w.r.t. WH criticism. If I remember, she’s torn Bush a new one on occasion.
I think Pelosi wants Murtha as the leader b/c he is immune from any war talk criticism, being that he’s a vet, and a rather pugnacious one at that.
Pb
That sounds way too clever, not to mention counterintuitive. But we’ll see…
Steve
I don’t want to oversimplify things, but she got a lot better after facing an unexpectedly strong challenge from a liberal primary opponent.
Richard Bottoms
Probably, but it doesn’t matter one way or the other.
We kicked Republican ass, Pelosi has rewarded Murtha with her support so even if he goes down that debt is paid.
ThymeZone
I say, less Inside Politics, and more Borat.
When will Pelosi open up relations with Kazakhstan?
demimondian
I don’t see any potential upside for this decision, except that Pelosi did promise to restore seniority rules to House committee chairmanships. For my part, I think Alcee Hastings is a terrible choice, but Pelosi’s hands are tied.
Chalk this one up to Dem Stupidity, John.
keatssycamore
Here’s my case for Hastings:
I’ve seen Jane Harman, I watched an entire Jane Harman interview (once and vowed never again) and Alcee Hastings is not Jane Harman.
ThymeZone
Already, the sex scandals begin.
Pooh
I have little to no opinion on Hastings, but for my money Harman heading the intelligence committee is almost as dumb as Lieberman heading Senate Foreign Relations…
Wait a minute…
Cue my favorite fun counterfactual: what happens in CT if Reid/Schumer let it be known immediately after the primary that someone running as an Indy loses all seniority? My bet is that Lamont wins by 10-15, given the way everything else played out. (That said, can’t exactly blame them, because they couldn’t have predicted Foley, “never were stay the course”, “Rummy4Evah”, Rush Limbaugh, etc…)
Steve
Lieberman won’t be the chair of Foreign Relations, FYI. His committee is the Senate counterpart to Henry Waxman’s committee.
alkali
“We ought to have someone running the House Intelligence Committee who has practical, hands-on experience with surreptitious, unethical behavior.”
Pooh
That’s much better…he’s in charge of holding hearings likely to make his BFF look bad…
demimondian
My fault here. I’d misremembered what HJ would be chair of.
neil
Here’s why Hastings should be the chairman. He’s the most senior member of the committee besides Harman. Harman should not be on the committee, she did a very poor job as ranking member and her ethics as ranking member were highly questionable.
As for Alcee, Whatever we may think about what he did before starting his political career, the unavoidable fact is that he was elected by the residents Florida’s 23rd congressional district and not by the House Democratic Caucus, and it would be unfair if they blackballed him because of something he did that was publically known before he ran for election. He has climbed the ladder, earned his seniority and has not done anything to lose it, unlike Harman.
Perry Como
The House should vote that Republicans must wear blue hats while on the House floor.
ThymeZone
Yess, and two Republican men must not go to urinal together to make bam-bam-bam as they do in our country at edge of forest.
just sayin
How did Hastings beat the bribery rap in court? As I remember, it was pretty much a matter of differing burdens of proof – in a criminal case it’s beyond reasonable doubt, while in an impeachment it’s left up the judgment of the Reps and Senators. Kind of like OJ beating the criminal rap but being held civilly responsible.
neil’s case for Hastings seems to justify his getting to keep his seat in Congress (that’s the choice of the voters in FL-23), but not giving him a leadership or chair role. Seniority should be one factor but shouldn’t be applied blindly. In this case, it’s bad for the country and bad for the Dems politically to allow this to happen, and Pelosi and the rest of the leadership should have the stones to prevent it.
I like alkili’s reasoning, in a Borat kind of way.
SeesThroughIt
I disagree. First of all Lieberman won because the GOP basically abandoned its own candidate to provide some Joe-mentum. Secondly, the vast majority of the voting public doesn’t give a crap about seniority. I don’t really see how something so inconsequential to most voters is going to turn the outcome upside-down.
Louise
Pelosi’s endorsement of Murtha seemed perfunctory and nothing more — and I hope I’m right, because Murtha (while doing a great job getting Bush on the ropes re: Iraq) is a corruption/earmark/pork case study waiting to happen.
I don’t know anything about Steny Hoyer except that I don’t trust his name. That’s a weird name.
neil
He apparently beat the bribery rap because most evidence against him was circumstancial and the key piece of direct evidence was too weak — a transcript Hastings talking to William Borders in what the prosectors said was code. The jury apparently did not agree, and instead sided with Hastings’ argument that Borders was running a scam without his awareness. (Borders was arrested for accepting a bribe in an FBI sting.)
I don’t think your analogy to civil vs. criminal standards is apt. It appears likely that most of the Senators who voted to remove Hastings did not review the evidence and instead voted based on their ‘gut.’ The impeachment trial was conducted before a 12-member panel, not before the whole Senate. Members were supposed to watch the proceedings on tape before voting, but after the vote it was revealed that the tapes had only been checked out of the library by 12 Senators. The members of the panel, for what it’s worth, did not vote to convict Hastings.
I don’t think you understood my point about Hastings’ seniority. I think it would be improper for the caucus to apply different seniority rules to Hastings than to other duly elected members just because he was removed from office. And I don’t think it’s bad for the country if he gets to earn seniority like everyone else.
neil
(To make that last paragraph a bit clearer, what I mean is that he shouldn’t start out with negative seniority because of what happened before he was elected, nor should he be ineligible to earn seniority. Of course you should be able to lose seniority for screwing up.)
Pooh
Nah, I independently (heh) remembered the same thing, Demi
MNPundit
Wow, thanks a lot John. Now we are fighting a Wiki-War over the Alcee Hastings page. I just reverted it back from “YOU SUCK!!!!”
Aside, yeah that’s a definite idiotic move not that I have particular confidence in Harman but Hastings? Blech.
MNPundit
Also, Steny Hoyer is against Net Neutrality.
Pooh
Not seniority, per se. But seniority means…EARMARKS. If you wonder what would have to happen for the wingers to throw W under the bus, consider, for example, the devotion of my home state to Uncle Ted Stevens. My mom, who’s literally just to the right of Cindy Sheehan would at least have to think about it before voting against him.
I think if you take that leg out from under Joe, he loses support both from Dems and GOPers who may have voted on grounds of narrow economic self-interest.
Pooh
Ugh. I for one welcome our new corporatist overlords, who happen to be the same as our old corporatist overlords.
jcricket
The inner-toobs have been a bit clogged lately. Must be all the Republican dump trucks.
Richard Bottoms
BTW, if Murtha and Hastings have ethical problems that need to be addressed now is the time to start looking for someone clean to run against them in the next primary in their districts.
Let’s learn from the GOP. Vote for your guys in the election no matter what, work against them in the primary if they need to be replaced.
grumpy realist
People like Lieberman are the best argument for a Dept. of the Wyoming Coast Guard, so he could be put in charge of it.
Capriccio
Sorry, I don’t have the exact quote, but I read where Pelosi said these chair(persons) don’t necessarily have to come from the committees. I’d say she’s skidding the way to remove Harman and Hastings out of harm’s way…or the way of harm.
mycat
Well here goes….I don’t necessarily believe any of this: Hastings knows a lot about the intelligences services. He hasn’t spent the last eighhteen years taking bribes. He’s spent it being an involved, knowledgeable Congressman (Graham and Levin say so). He isn’t necessarily guilty. He was aquitted in the first trial and the bipartisan committee of the Senate that investigated didn’t recommend conviction either. Sen Spector, the vice-chair, thought he should be acuitted by thhe Senate. The vote to convict was close and it was acknowledged at the time that the votes to convict came from Senators who did not attend the hearings and did not review the evidence. Since his guilt is by no means clear and he has friends on both sides of the aisle, including Spector and Graham, who think he was wronged and will go to bat for him now, it isn’t such a bad choice after all.
I still think she shouldn’t appoint him, but John asked for the pro-Hastings argument and that’s the best I can do.
neil
It’s easier to explain why Pelosi would appoint Hastings than to explain why Hastings would go on the all-American Dream Team for the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence. But it’s also not too easy to explain why a man who was acquitted of taking a bribe over 20 years ago, who has gone on to win election to the House eight times and who has never shown any ethical problems in all that time should be ruled out from any important position. It is easy, though, to see how the Republicans could attack him. But they should save that for the election.
Bob In Pacifica
I remember someone stating the Hastings case and doing a fair job of defending him, but for the life of me I can’t remember what he was impeached about and what the defense of him was. Jane Harmon suckles on defense contractors, so I’d just as soon it were someone else. The guy from Texas sounds good until the Wikipedia site gets the truth all straightened out.
Bob In Pacifica
When I was an officer in my union there was one of those political pose pictures taken with my arm around Nancy Pelosi’s waist. Better than a handshake pose. We made a beautiful couple. Circa 1990.
DougJ
This isn’t good. Not at all. I’m pretty much so upset by it that I don’t even want to think about it.
Democrats won because Republicans were seen as a party that put loyalty before competence and looked the other way when loyal cronies engaged in corruption. Now Democrats are doing the same thing (CREW lists Murtha as one of the three most corrupt Democrats in the House).
Anyway, I think this is a really bad sign.
DougJ
And you can call me a concern troll if you like. I believe very strongly that these are bad moves. I have problems with Hoyer but let’s try to find someone clean to fill his role if he is to go.
Mr Furious
I’ve never heard of Alcee Hasting before this thread. I’d like to keep it that way for everybody else…
If this guy was GOP I’d be quick to assume the worst. Just because he’s a Dem, I’m not exactly giving him a pass. Others above have cast some doubt about his guilt and the fact that he’s kept his nose clean, but to me that doesn’t cut any ice with me. Hastings’ history is a political nightmare for a Party trying to establish itself as an alternative to the corruption of the GOP. Appearances count.
Good for Hastings for having a successful legislative career after whatever occured back in he day, and if the people in his district want to keep sending him o congress that’s their business. But elevating him to chair-level makes it the nation’s business, and the Democratic leadership has an obligation to protect it’s political interest and to serve as a brake for sitiuations like this.
What’s good for Florida’s 23rd District isn’t necessarily what’s good for the Party or the country.
DougJ
I’m less anti-Hastings than anti-Murtha. I agree that what Hastings did before he was a Congressman isn’t entirely relevant. It looks bad, to be sure, to promote him, but I would argue that promoting Murtha actual _is_ bad.
demimondian
I basically agree with the Spoofmaster here. There’s no _a priori_ reason that these guys can’t do the jobs layed out for them, but I’m not happy promoting crooks and liars to replace crooks and liars. “Hooray for the new boss//Same as the old boss.”
But maybe I’m just naive and idealistic.
Redhand
A “Democratic Stupidity” tag should be established the instant that either Myrtha or Hastings gets a House leadership position with Pelosi’s support, explicit or tacit. Both of these characters absolutely stink of corruption. The assession of either to a leadership position will make the Democratic “Clean up the ‘Culture of Corruption'” meme the most short-lived campaign promise in American electoral history.
I can’t imagine anything better calculated to play into the Republicans’ hands come 2008. Besides, “Conservative on Defense” John Murtha is a genuine moonbat. Anybody being caught dead photographed with Code Pink instantly qualifies.
And what’s up with the Demos bringing in anti-Vietnam War fossil George McGovern to offer views on a US withdrawal from Iraq? A symbolic win of the ’72 Pres. Election 34 years after the fact?
Only Repub right wing idiocy of the highest order could cause the pendulum to swing this far to the opposite side. “Not a good start” as they say.
neil
DougJ is trolling again. CREW put Murtha on a list of ‘five Congressmen to watch‘ for corruption, along with their list of the 20 most corrupt Congressmen (which only had two Democrats on it). The reason they put him there is that his brother is a lobbyist. And again, in this era of cash-in-the-freezer, there’s not so much you can say about a guy who was taped refusing a bribe in an FBI sting.
Read that watchlist and decide whether it’s really justified to talk like Murtha is the second coming of Duke Cunningham. It doesn’t seem like the correct response to the unprecedented level of graft in the last Congress is to demand nothing short of perfection. Declaring that there’s no difference between someone who gets his brother a lobbying job and someone who accepts millions of dollars in bribes plays right into the hands of the latter crook.
neil
(Sorry, not clear.. Murtha is not on the list of the 20 most corrupt Congressmen. Rep Jefferson and Rep. Maxine Waters are the two Democrats on that list.)
Redhand
Interesting that “You outta Order, Shaddup!” Maxine is on the list of the 20 most corrupt congressional reps. She’s an absolute barbarian in the Cynthia McKinney mold; I didn’t know she’s also considered a crook. Why am I not surprised?
It sure is a depressing time to be an American. The last time I had any hope about the problem of incumbency and institutional corruption in D.C. was in 1994, when Gingrich’s “Contract With America” promised an Augean Stables cleanup of a Congress fouled by decades of near complete Democratic control. In the 12 years since the only thing the Republicans managed to prove was that the new boss was the same as the old one. And now the old boss is back.
demimondian
Sure there is. Just because he’s not a crook, a liar, and a fool (in the mold of Jefferson) doesn’t mean he’s not a crook and a liar, after all.
Paul
I think Nancy is about to blow chunks big time. She has been in politics so long ( all her life ) that politics as usual is all she knows. That is a deadly game to be playing right after a big election for change. I say screw Murtha and Hoyer. The ones who wan’t power the most are usually the least deserving. Get some clean, new blood in leadership. Ya listenin’ Nancy? Thought not.
Just remember, 2008 is the big prize. If Dems choose to make nice with the pres and repubs and basically help them out of the mess they have gotten the country in, they will just be helping the right wing take control again. Every ethically challenged or K-street Dem given a position of power in the leadership is another nail in the coffin of progressive change for America.
The Dems should take Cheney’s advice and go full speed ahead with oversight and their agenda.If Lieberman don’t like it let him switch parties. Let Bush veto everything he want’s and by 2008 the country will really be ready for some positive progress.
KCinDC
If anyone’s interested in keeping William “Cold Cash” Jefferson out of the House, you can support his opponent, Karen Carter (also a Democrat) in the December 9 runoff. Carter has been endorsed by Swing State Project, MyDD, and Daily Kos, as well as the Louisiana Democratic Party. I’m going to throw her a little cash.
KCinDC
Language Log had an interesting post about the “coded language” Neil mentioned.
DougJ
It does sound like Murtha has possibly steered contracts to his brother’s firms and, okay, I’m wrong, he wasn’t in the top 20, but he was on the five to watch.
I’m 100% serous when I say this: I want the squeakiest clean possible leaders in the House. And, no, I’m not disqualifying people for things like the stuff John Solomon writes.