About
Learn More about our progressive online community for the Granite State.

Create an account today (it's free and easy) and get started!
Menu

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?


Search




Advanced Search


The Masthead
Managing Editors
Dean Barker
Laura Clawson
Jennifer Daler

Contributing Writers
elwood
Mike Hoefer
susanthe

ActBlue Hampshire

The Roll, Etc.
Prog Blogs, Orgs & Alumni
Betsy Devine
Blue News Tribune (MA)
Democracy for NH
Live Free or Die
Mike Caulfield
Granite State Progress
Seacoast for Change
Susan the Bruce

Politicos & Punditry
Krauss
Landrigan
Lawson
Pindell
Primary Monitor
Scala
Schoenberg
Spiliotes
Welch

Campaigns, Et Alia.
Paul Hodes
Carol Shea-Porter
John DeJoie
Ann McLane Kuster
ActBlue Hampshire
NHDP
DCCC
DSCC
DNC

National
Balloon Juice
billmon
Congress Matters
DailyKos
Digby
Hold Fast
Eschaton
FiveThirtyEight
MyDD
The Next Hurrah
Open Left
Senate Guru
Swing State Project
Talking Points Memo

50 State Blog Network
Alabama
Arizona
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
Florida
Georgia
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Missouri
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin

Hodes Opposes Leadership: Pushes for Ethics Investigations of Fellow Democrats

by: JonnyBBad

Sun May 17, 2009 at 10:46:21 AM EDT


( - promoted by Dean Barker)

Another great reason to back Hodes for Senate 2010.
He's not your father's Democrat. He's got the necessary resolve to oppose corruption, even in his own party. Thank god someone is willing is to vote their conscience, not just their wallets. Pelosi's office had better understand they will lose national support by pushing to protect Murtha and other senior Dem lawmakers and their  ties to the PMA Group


As the House prepared to vote this week on Republican Rep. Jeff Flake's push for an ethics investigation involving Rep. John Murtha and other senior appropriators, Democratic leaders sent an unmistakable message to their members:

"Don't be a Flake."

That was the subject line of an e-mail that staffers for first- and second-term Democrats received Tuesday from Rep. Chris Van Hollen, assistant to Speaker Nancy Pelosi. The message said that Democrats would once again be "voting to table another Flake resolution" - and it made clear that leadership would have its eyes on any Democrats even thinking about defecting.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/s...

more after the jump

JonnyBBad :: Hodes Opposes Leadership: Pushes for Ethics Investigations of Fellow Democrats
It is the junior and newest members of Congress who are getting the most pressure from Leadership. Anybody who thinks this is a political move on Paul's part, doesn't understand the man. He represents us, and as a former prosecutor its not in his DNA to overlook crimes, just because they were done by members of his team.

http://www.politico.com/news/s...

snip

So far, the younger members are getting trounced - but the momentum is in their favor.
Despite the directives from Van Hollen and Clyburn, two more Democrats voted for Flake's resolution Tuesday, and they are the two newest Democrats in the House: Rep. Scott Murphy of New York and Rep. Mike Quigley of Illinois.

"This is who I am," Quigley, an outspoken reformer from a safe seat in Chicago, told POLITICO afterward. "You can't change your DNA when you get here."

snip

New Hampshire Rep. Paul Hodes - one of the first Democrats to back Flake's resolutions - said more junior lawmakers are more inclined to support a beefed-up ethics committee and broader ethics reforms.

"Having not been in Congress a long time, it may be easier for the younger members, the more junior members, to push for these reforms than it may be for more established members," he said this week.


The Change Coalition Lives
Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/s...
Poll
What is the correct way for Congress to Police Itself against Corruption
Eat Standing Up
Look the Other Way
Get a Cut for Themselves
Oh Hell Everybody Does It
Show Trial
Throw a Few Overboard
Fix IT !

Results

Tags: , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
There was a time when the major activity politicians engaged in was (0.00 / 0)
doling out public assets and resources for personal profit and exploitation.  Think:

fishing rights
grazing rights
mining rights
rights of way
etc.

And it seemed natural that a politician's supporters would be the primary beneficiaries of his representation.  Indeed, parties were defined by whose rights were going to take precedent--the elite or the workers or the farmers or the industrialists.  (Some groups, like native Americans, never got a break and rarely a pittance).
In short, the idea that representatives are supposed to look after the interests of all the people is rather recent--as recent as that all adult citizens are able to vote.  That may seem like a long time, but some people alive can still remember when that wasn't the case.  Which is also perhaps why not everyone's clear on what corruption is.


fix It. n/t (0.00 / 0)


'Aints no more

[ Parent ]
When I wake up tomorrow morning it better be FIXED. (4.00 / 1)


[ Parent ]
Murtha should go (4.00 / 1)
I don't get why Speaker Pelosi is so protective of Murtha.

"When you get to the end of your rope, tie a knot and hang on."  Franklin D. Roosevelt    

didn't he side with her (0.00 / 0)
in her Leadership move against Steny Hoyer ?

'Aints no more

[ Parent ]
? (4.00 / 1)
I thought she sided with Murtha in his move against Hoyer. But I'm not sure, Jon.  

"When you get to the end of your rope, tie a knot and hang on."  Franklin D. Roosevelt    

[ Parent ]
She did. (0.00 / 0)
But my understanding is that that was because she and Hoyer rub each other the wrong way on a personal level.  Wish I had a link to back that up, but it was a while ago, so take it for what it's worth.

[ Parent ]
Thanks TWTM and Kathy (0.00 / 0)
from November 2006...


http://www.washingtonpost.com/...
Democrats Pick Hoyer Over Murtha
House Colleagues Elect Pelosi Speaker but Reject Her Choice for Majority Leader

By Jonathan Weisman and Lois Romano
Washington Post Staff Writers
Friday, November 17, 2006; Page A01

House Democrats elected Rep. Steny H. Hoyer (Md.) the new majority leader yesterday over strong opposition from Speaker-elect Nancy Pelosi (Calif.), exposing a deep political divide even before the party takes control.

The 149 to 86 vote for Hoyer over Rep. John P. Murtha (Pa.) was viewed by many in the party as a repudiation of Pelosi's strong-arm tactics and a recognition of Hoyer's tireless work to elect a Democratic majority for the first time in 12 years. If the Hoyer camp's head count was correct going into yesterday's secret balloting, Pelosi and her allies may not have swayed a single vote for Murtha, a close associate.



'Aints no more

[ Parent ]
Found it. (0.00 / 0)
Hoyer will now work closely with Pelosi, although the two have sparred on several occasions - a rivalry that dates back to 1963, when both worked as interns for Maryland Sen. Daniel Brewster, the Baltimore Sun reports.

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/10...


[ Parent ]
46 years but hey who's counting ? n/t (0.00 / 0)


'Aints no more

[ Parent ]
And they are not even Irish n/t (4.00 / 1)


"When you get to the end of your rope, tie a knot and hang on."  Franklin D. Roosevelt    

[ Parent ]
They're from Maryland. (4.00 / 1)
With great respect to The Free State, Maryland has a long history of being at war with itself--and ending up on the correct side.

[ Parent ]
Pelosi et al protect Murtha for two reasons. (4.00 / 4)

1. He supported her quite strongly in the leadership fight.
2. Earmarks enable incumbents to access huge piles of cash not available to challengers.

The Republican leadership has not gotten strongly behind the Flake motion for an ethics investigation into Murtha for two reasons:

A. Earmarks enable incumbents to access huge piles of cash not available to challengers. (See Democratic reason 2 above). Both sets of leadership are in position to receive the lions share of donations from the recipients of earmarks this gives them a huge advantage over challengers in elections and as well as enhanced power within Congress that flows from their ability to have their well financed PACS make donations to other  members of Congress.

B. Some of the worst offenders in the Murtha/PMA scandal are prominent Republicans, lead by no other than our own John E Sununu who is number five (out of 525 members of Congress) in donations over the last decade from the PMA group that recently disbanded in the face of an intense FBI investigation into the illegal use of straw donors to make coordinated donations.

The earmarking by Judd Gregg of federal funds to benefit his own personal investments recently reported by Sharon Theimer of the AP is perhaps the clearest example extant of the rot that earmarks bring to our governance and the danger that the subject brings to the leadership of both parties in Congress.

In this light the true leadership shown by people such as Republican Jeff Flake and Democrat Paul Hodes in seeking to initiate an ethics investigation is impressive indeed.

"But, in the unlikely story that is America, there has never been anything false about hope." Si se puede. Yes we can.  


Just a touch of clarification (4.00 / 1)
"Earmarks enable incumbents to access huge piles of cash not available to challengers." Lest there be some easy misunderstanding, those Congresspersons don't get the cash themselves and neither does it amount to one additional dollar of funding in the budget as I understand it. The earmark process directs the funds, already budgeted, toward corporations, locations or organisations. The corruption upon which all the debate devolves amounts to a control of the recipients based upon personal preference assumed to generate support or campaign contributions or influence. The assumption is that there is some sort of feedback loop as no politician could or would possibly behave in some manner that might be described as altruistic.

[ Parent ]
Couple of thoughts: (0.00 / 0)
1
The earmark process directs the funds, already budgeted, toward corporations, locations or organisations

Well, sort of-- my understanding is that in the appropriations bill they have a sum that is unassigned, which is then divided upon among members based upon power to essentially hand out to whatever recipients they want. It is important to remember that these funds often if not almost always go for purposes that either the Federal Agency or the Congress as a whole didnt think qualified for an appropriation.

2. The point isnt that all earmarks are done in order to get donations-- many are done to benefit the district as a whole, with the idea that the Congressperson gets credit with the voters from bringing home the bacon.

The far more pernicious species of earmarks consists of situations in which the earmarks are intended to generate donations. If you look at the Sununu earmarks for PMA clients in the 2008 Defense Appropriations bill, few if any go to fund work being done in NH.

As for assumptions about altruism: I think we can assume that people like those at PMA do not engage in illegal straw donations (giving money in someone else's name in a coordinated fashion) out of altruism. They commit felonies and expose themselves to a possible extended stay in prison for the earmark they got and/or the one they hope to get in the future.

"But, in the unlikely story that is America, there has never been anything false about hope." Si se puede. Yes we can.  


[ Parent ]
I'll bet that the non-voting members of Congress got something close to zero donations from PMA (4.00 / 2)
I sort of knew the number was wrong ,but was late for work and knew I could rely on a Hampster to get it right.

"But, in the unlikely story that is America, there has never been anything false about hope." Si se puede. Yes we can.  

[ Parent ]
You never know; they can vote in committee, after all. (4.00 / 2)
And at least two of those six chair subcommittees.

[ Parent ]
My father's Democrat (4.00 / 1)
was my father.

my Mother (4.00 / 1)
is my father's Democrat

'Aints no more

[ Parent ]

Is there something wrong with majority rules?
Connect with BH
     
Powered by: SoapBlox