Can anyone explain why Murtha is against campaign reform?

[The Backlash Cometh]

I've read about his alledged ethical problems and how he was opposed to the new rules regarding gifts from lobbyists, and as far as I can see, his only redeeming value is that he probably is the best guy to help get us out of Iraq. However, is he carrying baggage or a hidden agenda that might present a problem down the road? In other words, is he an old guard Dem?

[thereismore]

1. is he against campaign reform? I cannot believe it. That would suck. nt

[The Backlash Cometh]

4. I'm just trying to sort this out myself.

I'm not even sure if it's called campaign reform. What Pelosi is doing seems to go further to put a quick stop to the corruption problems we have.

But here is the article that I read that piqued my curiousity:

One conservative Democrat said that a Murtha-Pelosi ally approached him on the House floor and said pointedly: "I hope you like your committee assignment, because it's the only one you're going to get."

In a phone call initiated by Murtha that same day, the lawmaker told the longtime politician that he had already signed a letter of support for Hoyer. The congressman said he was stunned when Murtha told him, "Letters don't mean anything."

and

Murtha, the ranking Democrat on the powerful Appropriations defense subcommittee, has been dogged by allegations that he has skirted ethical boundaries and has thwarted efforts to tighten rules on lobbying. Those questions were amplified yesterday after at least three attendees at the Tuesday-night meeting of Blue Dog lawmakers complained that Murtha had disparaged the Democrats' ethics and lobbying package.

"He said, 'You know, I believe it's total crap, but Nancy supports it, and I'm going to push it,' " said a senior Blue Dog Democrat and Hoyer supporter, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because he was divulging comments from a closed-door meeting.



http://www.rawstory.com/showarticle.php?src=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.washingtonpost.com%2Fwp-dyn%2Fcontent%2Farticle%2F2006%2F11%2F15%2FAR2006111501521_pf.html

[aintitfunny]

19. He clarified, in no uncertain terms, "Crap"

refers to there are more important items on the agenda, i.e. War. That is his focus and he thinks it is "Crap" wasting time. I am not expressing agreement or disagreement, just pointing out his response as detailed in his interview with Chris Matthews. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15737141/page/2/ and here are some pertinet snippets from the transcript":

"MURTHA: Let me tell you, I agree that we have to return a perception of honesty to the Congress. I agree with what Nancy’s trying to do. The crap I’m talking about is the crap that people have violated the law, the crap that the kind of things that have happened with Abramoff, the kind of things that have happened with some of the members—

MATTHEWS: But that’s not what you said. Didn’t you say it was total crap, what she was proposing?

MURTHA: What I said was, it’s total crap, the idea we have to deal with an issue like this, when—and it is total crap that we have to deal with an issue like this when we’ve got a war going on and we got all these other issues -- $8 billion a month we’re spending—"

I, personally, am good with Hoyer or Murtha, BOTH are good guys, BOTH would serve our party. I am not thrilled with the infighting.

[The Backlash Cometh]

26. As sad as it sounds, Corruption is an issue as important as the

Iraq War. He needs to make it understood by giving it his full support.

[pnwmom]

37. I'm not so sure. The Iraq war seems more important to me.

Both in terms of lives lost and money.

But there's no reason we can't address both.

[The Backlash Cometh]

39. We are IN the Iraq war BECAUSE of corruption.

As long as the powers that be can be cajoled with money to follow a disastrous policy, we, and the rest of the world, are in danger.

[pnwmom]

52. We're in the war because people like Bush and Powell lied

and members of Congress either believed them or felt that they would look bad if they didn't give Bush his authorization.

And we're in the war because Bush defied the limits of the authorization that he was given.

We're in the war because of lying, but that's not the same as corruption.

[The Backlash Cometh]

53. Oh, and I thought we were in there for the oil.

That's what I mean about corruption. Where there are greenbacks to be had, there are plenty of reasons to sabotage good public policy. The oil is the main reason Bush was interested in Iraq. Everything else was smoke and mirrors, atleast from the Bush inner circle. People like Colin Powell, on the other hand, needed to be manipulated, and this, perhaps they did by tweaking some sense of duty or, maybe, by giving his son a cushy job with the FCC. Everybody can be bought. But you follow the money to find the source.

You need to focuse on Bush's true motivation, not on how he went about achieving it.

[aintitfunny]

44. That may be true. I personally do not think

an elected official should accept a free soda from a lobbyist. I think it is a priority, unfortunately there are many priorities and saving lives by limited our losses in Iraq is right at the top. There are a lot of priorities period, I agree corruption is one of them.

However, it did not seem right to paint Murtha as corrupt. Steny Hoyer has won the day, I am okay with that.

[The Backlash Cometh]

56. I think this Democratic win will be limited in its success unless we

clearly make the correlation between corruption and bad public policy. You end the firrst, and it will go a long way to solving the second problem.

[Freddie Stubbs]

12. He was one of only 12 Democrats in the House to oppose McCain–Feingold

http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2002/roll034.xml

[sandnsea]

2. Hoyer is the lobbyist king

He opposes lobbying reform. He is our Tom Delay, make no mistake about it.

"Over the last year and a half, Hoyer—a protégé of Tony Coelho, the former California congressman who revolutionized Democratic fundraising in the 1980s—has led an aggressive effort to raise money from K Street lobbyists. Even more important, he has seemed unwilling to fundamentally rethink the unhealthy relationship between lobbyists and legislators that currently drives our political system. If Democrats are not only to regain power, but to maintain it and govern in a fairer and more responsive fashion, they’ll need to unite behind root-and-branch reform. But the evidence suggests that Hoyer lacks the political vision, and the will, to do so."


http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2006/0611.roth.html

[DemocratSinceBirth]

3. For Better Or Worse He's A Old School Pol Who Believes Niceties Like That Interfere With Business

I think that's a fair assessment.

[The Backlash Cometh]

6. Not a good thing.

That does not jive with this new era of transparency we're trying to achieve. If he has cronies that he thinks he needs to reward I say we play by his rules and use him to get us out of Iraq, then, show him the door.

[warrens]

5. On Hardball, he said he was misquoted

He evidently said that it was sad that we have to spend so much time on "this garbage" when there are more serious issues out there, and that a few criminals have pushed it to the top of the to-do list. He's not against it, just wishes the energy could be applied to Iraq or healthcare.

Personally, the interview sort of turned me against him. He sounds too one-issue to me.

[The Backlash Cometh]

7. If that issue is Iraq, then this may be the man and the time and the place.

We'll worry about his limitations after we leave Iraq. In the meantime, he can use the time to consider a change.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

8. Because He Thinks Goo Goo Good Government Types Are Effete

Again, I think that's a fair assessment...

[originalpckelly]

9. He's not against campaign reform, he's for the status-quo...

There's a big difference.

[The Backlash Cometh]

13. The little hairs on my arms and neck are rising.

The status quo? What status quo would that be? The one that transfers power from twiddle dee to twiddle dum?

[KittyWampus]

29. excellent quote BC!

The status quo? What status quo would that be? The one that transfers power from twiddle dee to twiddle dum?

[bluerum]

10. His point is that congress critters and senate members should be

smart, have integrity, be trustworthy enough so that this kind of legislation should not be required. He considers it a waste of time and resources.

I don't think that he is worried about his own skin. I think that he is worried about wasting time on something that should not be an issue.

But people are weak frail things - when you allow unlimited lobby dollars to be waved under their noses they follow the scent. And the responsibility of sorting out the legal contributions from the illegal contributions falls on the people who accept the money.

[The Backlash Cometh]

15. Well, that's the point, isn't it. It IS an issue.

Corruption in the house and senate, is one of two reasons that people voted for the Democrats and why they're now in power. Murtha had better not forget that.

[RB TexLa]

11. I find all this concern with campaign and lobbying reform quite funny

In Louisiana we prefer "pretty good" government, tends to be more efficient.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

14. That's One Way Of Looking At It...

Two things you shouldn't watch...

Legislation being made and sausage being made...

But can we be better than that?

[The Backlash Cometh]

16. I wouldn't have used Louisiana as a model example of government.

Even in pre-Katrina times, there were something fishy going on in Louisiana when it came to honest government, so let's avoid going down that road.

[RB TexLa]

20. I didn't advocate honest government

Like I said "pretty good" government

[The Backlash Cometh]

21. I'm shooting for better.

[berni_mccoy]

17. DAMNIT PEOPLE, HE IS NOT! There is an ORCHESTRATED CAMPAIGN to destroy his reputation

AND PEOPLE HERE ARE FALLING FOR IT!

Watch the ENTIRE TAPE HERE: http://journals.democraticunderground.com/berni_mccoy/127

Read my analysis.

Murtha NEVER criticized campaign reform, HE CRITICIZED THE PEOPLE WHO HAVE ETHICS ISSUES.

[The Backlash Cometh]

18. Then I suggest you write to rawstory, because they seem to be

encouraging this swiftboating. I'm going to hold judgment a little longer.

[greyl]

24. "I'm going to hold judgment a little longer."

You mean before you start a thread with a title which assumes he is against campaign reform?
Glad to hear it.

[The Backlash Cometh]

25. I included the word "allegedly" there somewhere.

There has to be a reason why people aren't sure about where he stands. This is an opportunity for him to come out and make it crystal clear.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

27. I Read Where He Was Of Only Four House Dems To Vote Against McCain-Feingold...

eom

[berni_mccoy]

30. Link please. And it better have a credible source.

It wouldn't be Freerepublic where you read that would it?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

32. You Should Apologize For Your Libelous Insinuation But I Won't Hold My Breath

Here's the link...

http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2002/roll034.xml


My bad it was twelve...


And if you have a shred of dignity you will withdraw your Free Republic crack...

[berni_mccoy]

41. Link doesn't work. And if you had a shred of dignity, you'd present evidence with your claims

[DemocratSinceBirth]

43. Here It Is Again

http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2002/roll034.xml


Quit while you're behind...

[berni_mccoy]

48. Likes like a lot more than 4 Dems voted NO on the BCRA

So, again, check your facts and evidence before buying into the hype.

Yes he voted no. And you could attack the voting record of every politician. The key is WHY did he vote no? Was it because he was breaking that law? Was it because he felt legislating campaign finance was useless (think 527's)? Was it because he felt the way to solve the problem was to make campaign finance publicly funded? Because vote records don't reflect reasoning, you should never use them alone to judge someone.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

51. Twelve House Dems Opposed It...Not Four...My Bad...

So he was a six percenter instead of a two percenter...

Sincerely, isn't that a distinction without a difference...

[DemocratSinceBirth]

22. It's Not An Isolated Incident- There's A Pattern...

He's a wheeler-dealer...

That's an emperical observation not a subjective judgement.

[berni_mccoy]

28. Present your evidence then.

I've not seen a shred of evidence that Murtha has a pattern of Ethics issues.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

34. Is CREW A Freeper Front Group? Oh My...

http://www.citizensforethics.org/press/newsrelease.php?view=178


This is a reverse form of McCarthyism... Accusing your opponents of being wingnuts...


In my best Joseph Welch voice"Have you no sense of decency, sir? At long last, have you left no sense of decency?"

[berni_mccoy]

45. CREW's Also Running a Headline that MISQUOTE's Murtha

They've jumped to the conclusion that everyone else has without knowing the facts.

Of course, if you READ the report they had on Murtha, you'd see statements like this:

If Rep. Murtha accepted campaign contributions from the PMA Group and its associates
in return for legislative assistance by way of federal earmarks for the lobbying firm’s clients he
likely violated 5 U.S.C. §7353 and House Rule XXIII.

You see, even CREW doesn't have the FACTS. IF they did, then Murtha would be in JAIL by now.

Should this issue be looked into? Certainly. But the way to do that is NOT by PROMOTING A BLATANTLY FALSE STORY on FAUX NEWS that SLANDERS his credibility.

If you ACTUALLY Watch the ENTIRE ABSCAM TAPE, you'd be defending Murtha and not discrediting him.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

46. Twenty Two GOPU Members On The List And Three Democrats

It seems CREW is one of the good guys...

http://www.beyonddelay.org/

[berni_mccoy]

49. And even the good guys buy the B.S. sometimes before they realize it's B.S.

And note that Murtha is in their dishonorable list, not in the 20 most corrupt. That's because they don't have any EVIDENCE to accuse him with. Should the allegations be investigated by the Ethics Committee? Certainly. But he's innocent until proven otherwise.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

47. I Have A Serious Question.

CREW is a non-partisan , progressive watchdog group...


Why did they put John Murtha on the "bad" list:

http://www.beyonddelay.org/

[berni_mccoy]

50. See my response above.

[Totally Committed]

23. Because his position on the war is his only "progressive" poition...

Otherwise, he's just another old-school Dem who wants to keep getting elected the old-fashioned way. And, btw, Hoyer is even worse, as he is the DLC pick, so I'm letting the Divine sort this one out.

TC

[mmonk]

31. Don't take everything you hear initially as is. My advice is to take

derogatory comments towards him with a bag of salt. Power politics are underway.

[The Backlash Cometh]

35. I'm doing better than that.

Constant vigiliance, and all that. It's good to have an open discussion on this issue so that we can get down to the truth. Or, the discussion itself might grow geometrically until Murtha himself, decides to speak clearly and explain himself in a way where there will be no question about what he stands for.

[The Wielding Truth]

33. Backlash , I see your concern, but when it comes to our country

Murtha has proven to be a supporter of what helps his constitutes and our democracy. If campaign reform would be stressed by us, the public, he would stand up a fight for changes against corruption.

He has shown himself to be a strong willed American more so than a self motivated politician. His strength is what has been lacking in current leadership. His loyalty has always remained, to my satisfaction, to the people he serves.

He is not in Washington for himself.

If he were he would not have cared that BushCo has been wiping America's face in mud.

[The Backlash Cometh]

36. I'm counting on it.

We make it an issue now, and good people in Congress will respond accordingly.

[KittyWampus]

38. Bullshit, Murtha is a homophobic, anti-choice old fool. If the high number of people

who cited corruption as their important issue doesn't send a signal to the geezer, what will?

He thinks that everyone should just be ethical. Yeah, right. That has worked SO well in past. Look how well it works for corporations.

And with Pelosi using this bill to show Democrats are cleaning up government Murtha is a complete idiot for not realising the importance of using legislation to both mold behavior and garnering public support.

[The Backlash Cometh]

40. There are too many good ole boys in my area to feel comfortable

with Murtha's response the way you describe it. They expect all the little people in the community to be good and follow rules, while they feel it's their right to bend the rules in the back room...for the good of the community.

I just want to be sure Murtha, isn't that kind of person.

[The Wielding Truth]

54. You really think Hoyer is a better choice? Well, we will see.

[grizmaster]

42. He's not against it

stop buying the MSM cr@p and check out what he really said

[librechik]

55. Forget about Murtha, I have

as soon as I found out he was anti choice, I lost my lust for Murtha. Let him go to the back bench. Pelosi was just being loyal to an old friend; she should be admired for that, not villified.