Opinion from the "left coast".REP. Nancy Pelosi's willingness to wade into the intra-party fight for House majority leader sent at least two strong signals about the leadership style of the incoming speaker. One, she values and rewards loyalty. Two, she is willing to take risks on behalf of people and ideals she believes in.
On a substantive level, Pelosi's support for U.S. Rep. John Murtha, D-Pa., suggested the Democrat-controlled House will take a forceful role in trying to reshape Iraq policy. As a Vietnam veteran with a hawkish history, Murtha's call for a phased withdrawal from Iraq proved a tipping point in emboldening some Democrats to challenge the faltering Bush White House approach.
One of the potential risks for Pelosi is that rank-and-file House members might resent the sudden intervention from the top -- or that Murtha may not win. Before Pelosi got involved, Murtha was regarded as an underdog to U.S. Rep. Steny Hoyer, a Maryland Democrat who lost to Pelosi in the 2001 battle for minority whip. Leadership battles can be among the most personal and intensely contested matters in the U.S. Capitol.
Pelosi's pledge to Murtha was a risk not only because of potential strains with Hoyer loyalists, but because it turned the spotlight to concerns involving Murtha's relationships with lobbyists whose companies received a combined $100 million federal earmarks that Murtha helped secure. A Washington Post story on Tuesday detailed how the largest featured recipient of earmarks, the PMA group, had contributed more than $200,000 to Murtha's campaign in each of the last three election cycles. Also, Murtha's brother was a senior partner in a consulting firm that received a $4.2 million earmark -- allegedly with Murtha's assistance -- in 2004.
SF Chronicle
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
