Murtha vs. Hoyer

November 13, 2006

With the elections over, and the Dems in control, the first big fight for the party isn’t with the administration or the outgoing GOP majority, it’s within — Dems need to fill leadership posts. The party avoided one contentious fight last week on the Majority Whip gig, but the Majority Leader contest is just heating up.

House Speaker-to-be Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) endorsed Rep. John P. Murtha (D-Pa.) yesterday as the next House majority leader, thereby stepping into a contentious intraparty fight between [tag]Murtha[/tag] and her current deputy, Maryland’s Steny H. [tag]Hoyer[/tag]. […]

[I]n her first real decision as the incoming speaker, Pelosi said she was swayed by Murtha’s early stance for a withdrawal of U.S. forces from Iraq. Her letter of endorsement yesterday made clear that she sees Iraq as the central issue of the next Congress and that she believes a decorated Marine combat veteran at the helm of the House caucus would provide Democrats ammunition in their fight against congressional Republicans and President Bush on the issue.

This is shaping up to be more about personal relationships than ideological grudges. Support crosses over intra-party factions — Hoyer enjoys support from some leading progressives, including Barney Frank and Maxine Waters, as well as conservative “Blue Dog” Democrats. Murtha, meanwhile, has the backing of liberal champions like George Miller, as well as several middle-of-the-road types.

Personally, I don’t have a favorite in this fight, but there’s one common belief that should probably be straightened out: Murtha is not a liberal champion.

My first exposure to Murtha came when I worked at AU. Congressional Republicans would mount frequent attempts to gain state-sponsorship of the Ten Commandments — and Murtha was always one of a handful of House Democrats who would join them. In 1999, when the GOP tried to push through a measure to make it easier for states to impose school prayer, Murtha joined them on that, too.

In 2000, the Christian Coalition published a scorecard of every member of Congress. The group went out of its way to make Republicans score higher, but Murtha managed to get a 48% score — one of the higher ratings for a Dem in the House — after backing the conservative line on anti-abortion measures, in opposition to campaign-finance reform, and against gay adoption.

To be clear, I like Murtha. He’s a decorated war hero who, after initially backing Bush on the war, hasn’t pulled any punches. He’s shown nothing but courage and leadership on national security issues his entire career. The right-wing smear against him was ridiculous, but he never faltered or backed down.

But truth be told, neither Murtha nor Hoyer are progressive by any reasonable definition of the word. I enthusiastically agree with every word in Kevin Drum’s analysis.

On both economic and social issues he’s more conservative than Hoyer (who is himself already in the rightward half of the Democratic caucus). He’s pro-gun and anti-abortion (0% from NARAL!). And while I’m annoyed that Hoyer voted for the bankruptcy bill last year, Murtha voted for it too. Matt pointed out that Murtha is more conservative than Hoyer based on Keith Poole’s computer-generated models, and that matches up with National Journal’s more traditional rankings for 2005 based on roll call votes.

I don’t really have any big axe to grind here. Hoyer is too close to K Street for my taste, and both Hoyer and Murtha are more conservative than I’d like. I appreciate Murtha’s anti-war stand, but since it’s based more on troop issues than on progressive foreign policy principles I’m not sure how happy I’m likely to be with his future positions on national security issues. Bottom line: This race is probably a bit of a tossup, and I wouldn’t leap into bed with Murtha too quickly just because he took on Bush over Iraq. He’s not exactly a progressive dream candidate.

My point isn’t to take unnecessary shots at a Dem leader, and I hate to see the party stoke fires of internal dissent so quickly after a landmark election cycle. I just think it’s important for Dems to appreciate the contest dynamics here: for Majority Leader, the choice is between two right-leaning Dems, one who has voted a little too much with K Street, and one who voted a little too much with the religious right.

Hmmm…K Street, or the wingnuts. So few options; so much to decide!

Well, given that there’s not a lot to investigate on the religion-side of this coin, but there’s so-oooo much to investigate in the K Street fiasco—I think I’d have to go with Murtha on this one. He’s also the stronger option for looking into the Iraq/Afghan mess, and by pissing off the stay-the-course crowd (and this election was at least somewhat about how stay-the-course has been a trainwreck of gargantuan proportions), he’s apt to be “a bit more of a beacon, and less of a spent matchstick….”

  • Maybe Hoyer and Murtha will wound each other so much that a progressive can step in and take the spot 😉

  • Isn’t Pelosi a progressive? And if the majority whip is a progressive, wouldn’t Hoyer or Murtha provide a bit of balance in the leadership? (I say this not knowing who is going to be the whip).

  • Iraq Iraq Iraq
    Dems are tooling up for the single most important issue upon which all else in 08 depends. It’s good to see Democrats finally playing by political chess strategy instead of political checkers.

  • If Pelosi pushes hard enough for Murtha, he’ll get it.

    And since the Democrats are still looking for a public face who can seem both tough and anti-war, I suspect she’ll push for him.

    CB, in addition to Murtha’s social-conservative tendencies (which I have to believe he’ll moderate under Pelosi’s leadership), he comes with some ethical questions too. If Republicans push that hard enough, they could muddy up the “reformer” cred that helped Democrats win big last week. The question I have is whether the “war hero” or “old-timey crooked politico” storyline ultimately would dominate.

  • I hate the religious wingnuts, but we have to keep them disoriented. Murtha could do that.

    And K street is truly toxic waste.

    Murtha by a nose.

  • dajafi has a good point, and one we should take to heart. No matter how well decorated a war hero is, if they’re corrupt, they’ve gotta GO.

    Reid has his own issues, too:

    (from TPM)

    …a friend of Reid’s who had co-owned the plot with the senator — sold Reid his portion for $10,000, when the county assessor had valued the plot at $339,620…

    http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/001983.php

  • The post is majority leader. Strikes me that Murtha has shown the strength and flexibility, and has the national profile, so that a majority of Dems can be pleased with his leadership. And if you don’t think that this is Mrs. Pelosi’s show anyway you have not been paying attention. She has impressed the hell out of me so far.

    The “controversy” here strikes me as being manufactured in the same shops that would have you believe the election was a new endorsement of conservatism.

  • The “controversy” here strikes me as being manufactured in the same shops that would have you believe the election was a new endorsement of conservatism.

    Most definitely.

    I’m not nearly enough of an insider to know what qualities are best for a majority leader, but they’re both Democrats so I’m already happy with the options available. It’s too bad they aren’t liberal Democrats, but I’ll live. I don’t expect them to start backing any anti-liberal measures I’d disapprove of, like the GOP would.

  • I don’t know much about Hoyer, but Murtha got a “Dishonorable Mention” with regard to his ethics.

    http://www.beyonddelay.org/summaries/murtha.php

    This is something, by the way, that does not surprise me given Murtha’s avowed “religious convictions”–in fact, anyone who spouts off about their Christianity is a crook to me unless proven otherwise, Democrat or Republican. No one with ethical issues should be trusted with a leadership position, especially after everything our country’s gone through in the last six years.

  • Dem’s need to be aware that the center is the center. No gun control. I don’t give a shit about abortion as a legislative priority. Get the hell out of Iraq. I dont care about gay issues regarding marriage.Balance the budget. Quit spending or borrowing money we don’t have.Fair trade is bullshit. what I want to see is smart trade. I don’t care if the other country is screwed or not. China has us by the balls and we are going to sell them the military technolgy to defeat us. Some one (WE ! ) have to decide That the parties are not in charge. A good start would be to put all elected federal officals pay and benifits under their respective state legislative control.In a legislative primary,regardless of party,if only two people are running it should become nonpartisan and conducted in the general election. I vote for the center. I try to mind my own affairs. I don’t owe money I think it is time for the rest of the nation to practice these same beliefs.

  • I have this vague memory of some dust up in which Hoyer appeared to be undermining Nancy Pelosi in her role as minority leader. That was the first thing that popped into my head when I heard she was backing Murtha. If I am remembering correctly, I cannot blame her for wanting her second in command to be loyal to her.

    That said, it is pretty hard for me to gin up much enthusiasm for either Murtha or Hoyer (I’ll just leave my unease w/Pelosi aside for a moment) in the role of majority leader. It troubles me that Murtha’s name continues to resurface with regard to ethics issues. If one wants to run the “most honest Congress ever,” one must be certain the team is clean, IMO. Hoyer is also supposedly tainted by K St ties. Nope. Cannot get too excited by either choice, although Murtha has his stance on the war to burnish his credentials a bit.

  • “China has us by the balls and we are going to sell them the military technolgy to defeat us.” – E.C. Sedgwick

    Now that is a clear-eyed observation!

  • Rep. Hoyer, along with (indicted) Bob Ney, and fundraising by Robert Gates (yes, that one) helped FOIST THE HELP AMERICA VOTE ACT (otherwise known as federally-required voter purgelists, super-expensive easy-to-hack electronic voting machines, and the shockingly illegal elections Act).

    Hoyer is complicit with the vote-fraud — who CARES what else he is?

    Voting against HAVA? Pelosi, Murtha, Conyers, Kucinich, and, yes, Waters.

    The military is in seriously bad shape as a result of Rumsfeld’s Folly. We need a majority leader who is close to the Joint Chiefs (that Rumsfeld despised), in order to help them rebuild the services. Such a majority leader will win us a great deal of votes in 2008 — while Hoyer promises to bring the Old Dead DNC back with a vengeance.

    Support Murtha for Majority Leader. Call or write your representatives today.

  • “The problem with Murtha is that he’s an earmarks guy. He got honorable mention as one of Congress’s most corrupt reps and is generally opposed to lobbying reform of all kinds” –owenz

    Murtha is closely involved with the military, so it’s not surprising that he is a player. However, Hoyer has VERY SHADY company in pushing the HAVA, and I would rather have the devil I know, rather than the angel I don’t.

    Murtha is very traditional, and we are a big party that needs traditional on board. This coup isn’t over, yet, and Murtha is someone who cannot be attacked as a lefty. Hoyer isn’t a lefty either, but he will be easy to attack as such. Murtha strengthens our credentials in national security, which is a part of the myth about Democrats that we have to change, now.

    And Murtha was out front of the campaign to change policy in Iraq.

    Furthermore, if PELOSI WANTS HIM, then we should help deliver him. She knows Hoyer well, and apparently doesn’t want him to run the House caucus. Isn’t that reason enough?

  • I can’t stand Hoyer, so earlier today I was in favor of Murtha because at least he would be loyal to Pelosi, which would mean a drastic reduction in the number of Democratic infighting stories we would have to read in the next 2 years. After reading that Murtha is strongly opposed to investigating military contractor corruption in Iraq, I really wish they would both resign from Congress and get out of public life permanently. I’m disgusted by how many of our Representatives and Senators are completely owned by various and sundry corporations.

  • Thanks to a fool named Rumsfeld, the troops in Iraq are mortally dependent on those “military contractors.” Investigating the contractors will hake them angry; they’ll pull out, and leave the troops with their pants down and their backsides exposed to what amounts to a full-blown civil war.

    The troops get fuel from those “contractors.” They get food from those “contractors.” They get their ammunition, support equipment, computer support, spare parts, hospital equipment, and just about everything else but the kitchen sink from those “contractors.”

    Come to think of it, those “contractors” probably have some strings attached to the kitchen sink, as well. Get the troops out of Iraq FIRST, and then watch as Murtha chews the contractors up, and spits their remains into the Potomac….

  • Conservative — I could stomach. Being a porker… I could *almost* stomach, especially if he promised to keep his nose clean in the future. But, *twisting Dem arms* to vote against increase for veterans’ health benefits? A guy who’s — supposedly — pro military? Barf. His stance on Iraq was super, and I respect him for it. But, while it may be one of the most important issues, it’s not the only one.

    http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/001984.php

    TuiMel, @14 is absolutely right:
    If one wants to run the “most honest Congress ever,” one must be certain the team is clean, IMO.

    Don’t we have *any* Dems in Congress who are squeaky-clean enough to represent the *majority*?

  • Theonly problem Haney Stoyer has with the DeLay Machine is that it wasn’t the Hoyer Machine, and he badly wants to build one. We really need to stay the hell away from that sort of thing. I don’t see Murtha getting into this shit, and it is something that can clobber us in 2008 if Hoyer – who is entirely too comfortable with having been a Leading Loser in DC – is in a position to pull this stuff off.

  • From The HIll (reported over at TPM):

    House Speaker-to-be Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) will ensure that Rep. John Murtha (D-Pa.) wins his race for majority leader, a key Murtha ally said Monday night.

    “She will ensure that they [the Murtha camp] win. This is hard-ball politics,” said Rep. Jim Moran (D-Va.), a longtime Murtha supporter. “We are entering an era where when the Speaker instructs you what to do, you do it.”

    Pelosi recently endorsed Murtha’s bid for majority leader against House Democratic Whip Steny Hoyer (D-Md.), but it was unclear whether she would use her clout as the first Democratic Speaker in 12 years to help Murtha win or whether her letter simply expressed a personal preference as a favor to Murtha.

    Pelosi’s move was deliberate, Moran said, and she was already leaning on her colleagues to affect the outcome.

    “Yes, she’s making calls to people. She is contacting people and letting them know that it’s an unequivocal letter,” Moran said.

    If Moran’s claims are true, Pelosi is taking an enormous gamble only a week after the election propelled her into the Speakership. If she prevails, she will likely banish her onetime rival Hoyer to the back benches and send a clear signal to her colleagues that she intends to rule with an iron hand. If Hoyer wins, she loses substantial political capital and alerts the caucus that they can successfully oppose her.

  • This a rather unfortunate situation. The Hill report is accurate. Pelosi is staking her ability to work effectively as leader on an intra-party fight over majority leader. She is making this a serious test of loyalty and is going to be especially hard on the new members of Congress. She has real personal issues with Hoyer and does not want him majority leader. There is no 3rd option, Murtha or Hoyer will be leader and it’s going to be an ugly battle, the fall-out of which could seriously undermine Pelosi’s ability as Speaker.

    From what I can tell, there is no dispute over the majority whip, it’s sgoing to be James Clyburn.

  • I think overall I’d also have to go with Murtha. When Hoyer was minority leader, I always got the sense that he wasn’t really doing anything, like he was just some sort of tag-along. It sounds like Murtha may have some lobbyist issues himself and I think Dems should make best possible efforts to rid themselves of this scourge (fat chance). But Murtha has a national name now and I have the sense that people see him as someone that was attacked from the right, withstood that attack, and therefore must be pretty ok. Accurate or not, I think that’s the perception of him. Steny Hoyer just has a weird name and will not/does not resonate with the American people. Plus I think Murtha tempers some of the animosity out there for Pelosi as he can be called upon to talk to the press, etc., and do the sales job.

    On a side point, I think everyone deserves kudos for being willing to discuss, be critical, etc., of our own party members unlike the GOP who follow blindly no matter what road they may take you down. A lot of diversity and diverse opinions under the Dem tent….

    • Comments are closed.