Hoyer backs Pelosi, smacks Rep. Jefferson
By Josephine Hearn
The chances that Rep. William Jefferson (D-La.) will keep his seat on the powerful Ways and Means Committee grew slimmer yesterday as House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) issued a stinging assessment of the embattled Louisianan’s legal situation.
“He sits on a tax-writing committee, and he had $90,000 found in his freezer. I think he’s got a tax problem if nothing else,” Hoyer said, responding to reporters’ questions about whether Democrats would seek to oust Jefferson forcibly from the panel even though he has yet to be charged with a crime.
Jefferson pointedly declined a recent request from House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) for him to step down, reasserting his innocence and implying that she should ask the same of Rep. Alan Mollohan (D-W.Va.) who has faced ethics questions about earmarks he obtained on the Appropriations Committee.
“If members are to be treated equally, I think Mr. Mollohan has an appropriations problem,” a Democratic aide sympathetic to Jefferson fumed.
Last night, members of the House Democratic Steering and Policy Committee were expected to discuss Jefferson’s dilemma at a members-only meeting. If Pelosi were to remove Jefferson forcibly, she would first have to put the issue to a vote of that body, which has jurisdiction over Democrats’ committee assignments. That vote was not expected to occur last night, but she could pursue it at a later date.
Last night’s meeting was convened to discuss Democratic message crafting, with Rep. George Miller (D-Calif.) acting as chairman. Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.) typically chairs meetings in which committee assignments are decided.
Hoyer said yesterday that he hoped the committee would seek to oust Jefferson.
“I personally believe that Mr. Jefferson should step down from the Ways and Means Committee, and if he doesn’t step down our caucus should take action.”
If Democratic leaders do put the issue to a vote, Jefferson will have few allies on the committee. It is stocked with Pelosi loyalists.
Even among the committee’s 10 members from the Congressional Black Caucus (CBC), Jefferson would be hard-pressed for friends. Reps. James Clyburn (D-S.C.), chairman of the Democratic caucus, and Rep. Charles Rangel (D-N.Y.), senior Democrat on Ways and Means, have not rushed to his aid.
Several more junior CBC members, however, may speak out on his behalf. Rep. Donald Payne (D-N.J.) has been supportive, even though he occupies one of the 15 slots appointed by Pelosi on the steering committee.
Rep. Gregory Meeks (D-N.Y.) sits on the panel as a regional representative. He may harbor some lingering ill will against Pelosi because she backed Rep. Mike Honda (D-Calif.) when the two were vying to become a vice chairman of the Democratic National Committee.
A spokesperson for Meeks could not immediately comment.
Hoyer’s call for Jefferson to step aside marks only the latest time he has vociferously supported a Pelosi decision. The whip has at times been at odds with Pelosi, his onetime leadership rival. Pelosi bested Hoyer in a race for Democratic whip in 2002.
These days, however, Hoyer says he has only unalloyed endorsements for the minority leader and her ability to unify the caucus.
“Nancy has worked harder in my opinion than anybody I have seen in my 26 years in Congress,” Hoyer averred yesterday. “[Former Minority Leader] Dick Gephardt [D-Mo.] I thought was the hardest worker I could find. Nancy works harder than Dick. She travels more. She raises more money. She works harder than message. She’s doing a wonderful job.
“If we lose, it will not be Nancy Pelosi’s fault. She’s done everything she possibly could to insure our victory. ... Win, lose or draw, she’s going to be our leader.”
Hoyer was responding to a recent report that Rep. Rahm Emanuel (D-Ill.), chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, may mount a challenge to Pelosi if Democrats fall short of taking control of the House.
Emanuel said, “Congresswoman Pelosi is the leader. I’m not interested in [challenging her], and I support her.”
In a moment of levity, Hoyer quipped that the question may be a “moot point.”
“If we don’t take back the House after the situation we’re in now, we’re all going to shoot ourselves in the head!” he quipped, then added, “I didn’t mean it literally. Put your hopes aside.”
Pelosi is virtually assured of becoming Speaker unopposed if Democrats take control. Despite some concerns among Democrats that she is a poor spokeswoman for the party, the caucus is unlikely to miss the chance to elect the first female Speaker or to reward her for ending a dozen years in the political doldrums.
Even if Democrats do fall short of taking power, it is unclear who would challenge Pelosi. Hoyer has said time and again that he has no desire to take her on again. Emanuel, while seen as hardworking, smart and effective, has little seniority and has engendered ill will in some factions of the caucus with his colorful and direct language.
Mollohan is the paradigm crooked Congressman using earmarks and "foundations" for government fraud. All of the House earmarks should be examined for fraud----and all of their "foundations."
On a congressman's salary, Rep. Alan Mollohan's (D-W.Va.) net worth increased from about $100,000 in 2000 to $11.4 million in 2005, at the same time he was directing millions of government dollars in "earmarks" to nonprofit organizations in his district that are run by his business partner and some campaign contributors.
Duh----can you say kickbacks?
A closer examination revealed that Mollohan and his wife had more than $2,000,000 in real estate investments with Mollohan’s former staffer, Laura Kuhns, and her husband.
Kuhns also ran a nonprofit, Vandalia Heritage Foundation, which had received more than $28 million in Congressional appropriations earmarks with Mollohan's help from 2000 through 2005. Kuhns was also on the board of other nonprofit groups which had received over $100 million in earmarks of federal funds during the same period with Mollohan's help.
Mollohan's 2000 Financial Disclosure Report listed his income-producing assets as being worth from $179,012 to $562,000 with liabilities of $170,000 to $465,000. Among the liabilities was Visa credit card debt listed as $45,003 to $150,000. Just four years later, Mollohan's 2004 Financial Disclosure Report showed him with assets worth $6,313,025 to $24,947,000 offset by liabilities in the $3,665,011 to $13,500,000 range. It also showed him owning an oceanfront beach house on Bald Head Island, NC which was valued at $1,000,000 to $5,000,000. NLPC found that Mollohan was renting the beach house during the summer of 2005 for $11,975 a week.
Freedom of Information Act documents revealed thousands of pages of real estate, financial and legal documents. Slowly a picture of Mollohan's finances emerged that was sharply different from the one being portrayed in Mollohan’s Financial Disclosure Reports.
Using NPO's to siphon off monies is a classic swindle. The IRS has documented numerous financial scams by so-called "non-profits" and "foundations." Any number of financial frauds can be hidden in a non-profit (or Foundation) by calculatedly wrapping oneself in high-minded ideals with the intent of engaging in tax fraud.
The IRS should determine whether Mollohan's NPO is properly accounting for all its activities derived from government grants, and whether it is inflating legal costs, and whether it is using government grants for the purposes stated. Taxpayers need to know whether this NPO is engaged in Enron-style accounting and spending practices using government grants---which could be grounds for government fraud charges.
Let's tell it like it is----"earmarking" the practice of adding on to a Congressional appropriations bill ---- to fund a Congressman's own "foundation" is government fraud. Period.