Posted on 10/02/2006 5:26:24 PM PDT by radar101
WASHINGTON – For more than a decade, Rep. John Murtha of Pennsylvania has operated a political trading post in a back corner of the House of Representatives.
A gang of about two dozen Democrats mill around his seat. A procession of others walk back to request pet spending projects, known as earmarks. And Republicans come by, asking him to enlist some of those Democrats to join them on close votes.
“Whether they get what they want in the bill or they get the votes they are looking for, nobody ever leaves completely disappointed,” said Rep. Paul Kanjorski, D-Pa., who often is found in what is known as the Murtha corner.
Outside Washington, Murtha, a Vietnam veteran and longtime hawk, may be best known for his turn against the Iraq war last year. Inside the Capitol, he is best known for turning earmarks into power. As the top Democrat on the House military spending subcommittee, he often delivers Democratic votes to Republican leaders in a tacit exchange for earmarks for himself and his allies.
In the past year, Democratic and Republican floor watchers say, Murtha has helped Republicans round up enough Democratic votes to narrowly block a host of Democratic proposals: to investigate federal contracting fraud in Iraq, to reform lobbying laws, to increase financing for flood control, to add $150 million for veterans' health care and job training, and to exempt middle-class families from the alternative minimum tax.
In one case that particularly irked Democratic partisans, Murtha led three others in voting against a politically vulnerable Louisiana Democrat's proposal to divert money intended to be spent on base closings to research prosthetic limbs for veterans. It failed by one vote.
For their “nays” on that and other matters, all four Democrats were rewarded. In the weeks after the vote, they claimed credit for a total of more than $250 million in earmarks in the 2006 appropriations bills. Murtha brought home more than $70 million for his district and $120 million for his state, according to Taxpayers for Common Sense, a nonpartisan group that tracks such projects.
Murtha, who announced a bid this spring to become the next House Democratic leader, acknowledges some Democrats grouse about his history of leading others across the aisle. Several Democrats said as much, but none would speak publicly.
He confirmed working with Republicans on the Iraq war spending vote that blocked the Democratic corruption investigation, but said he didn't remember the others. He said he always acted on principle, working with Republicans either because he agreed with them or to uphold private agreements about spending bills.
“You just need to get the things done, so you give them the votes to get the things done,” he said. “There is no question some projects come out of it for our members, and that is not a bad thing.” He added, “Deal making is what Congress is all about.”
Murtha can punish lawmakers. Those who don't support the defense spending bill, for example, discover their next earmark requests go nowhere. “Let me tell you the facts of life,” Murtha said he tells balky legislators. “If you vote against this bill, you won't have any input at all the next time.”
Earmarks – often buried deep in complex bills by unidentified lawmakers – have come under scrutiny since last year when former Rep. Randy “Duke” Cunningham, R-Rancho Santa Fe, pleaded guilty to conspiracy and tax evasion for taking more than $2.4 million in bribes from defense contractors.
The cost of earmarks has tripled in the last decade to about $64 billion a year, according to the Congressional Research Service. Murtha and other lawmakers say many earmarks are worthwhile, but critics charge they waste taxpayers' money, encourage cronyism and foster self-dealing.
Some members of Congress complain earmarks corrupt lawmaking in other ways.
“They are used as internal bribery in order to get members to vote for a piece of legislation they wouldn't ordinarily give two minutes to,” said Rep. David Obey of Wisconsin, the top Democrat on the House Appropriations Committee.
No one is more adept at such trading than Murtha, say current and former members, congressional aides and outside observers.
“He delivers Democrats for key votes, which increases his clout and ability to get more earmarks, which then increases his ability to get Democratic votes,” said Steve Ellis, a vice president of Taxpayers for Common Sense. “He has basically got it coming and going.”
Aside from his support for military spending, Murtha's politics are hard to characterize. He leans right on abortion rights and gun control but left on labor, tax and social-welfare issues. And he consistently opposes ethics reform or disclosure requirements, including a proposal this year that would have required lawmakers to sign their names to earmarks, on the grounds that voters police lawmakers' actions.
He has sided with Republicans 174 times on close votes since 1994, more often than all but three of the most conservative Democrats. Many of those votes have been on nonideological but politically pivotal questions. For example, Murtha has often led members from his corner crowd to vote for procedural rules that limit potential amendments or debate on Republican bills – votes that typically follow party loyalty.
Dick Armey, a former Republican majority leader, said his party's strategists would often tell him, “Murtha will get us some votes.”
At 74, Murtha remains an imposing figure: 6 feet 3 inches tall, with giant hands spread wide as he talks and size 12 shoes stuck out into the aisle. His corner perch is the only seat informally reserved for an individual lawmaker. “No one else dares sit there,” said Rep. Mike Doyle, D-Pa., a Murtha protege.
He can also be very persuasive, thanks to his position on the spending committee. “If Jack Murtha tells you he needs your vote, then you would have to think very hard before not delivering it,” said Rep. James Moran, D-Va., who sits on the subcommittee and in Murtha's corner. “There are just too many chits out there.”
Members have watched with envy as Murtha has used earmarks to remake Johnstown, Pa., an impoverished former steel town that now includes a Murtha highway, a Murtha airport and a Murtha health center. He has steered billions of dollars to his district over the years, including more than $80 million in the defense spending bill passed Friday, according to a preliminary tally.
Elected to the House in 1974, Murtha learned the politics of parochial projects from former Speaker Tip O'Neill, who named Murtha to the defense appropriations subcommittee and used him as his eyes and ears on the floor.
He survived a brush with scandal during the 1980 Abscam investigation, when he did not accept but did not rule out taking a $50,000 bribe from undercover agents of the FBI; he became a cooperating witness.
Murtha said he and his staff did their best to vet every earmark request but ultimately relied on the judgment of the members. He said he always asks, “Is this worthwhile not only to your district but to the country?”
Hey radar, you know that Hannity and Colmes will be devoted to Murtha/ABSCAM tonight?
At Boot Murtha they have the announcement for tonight.
This is for those who didn't see the full tape:
Murtha/ABSCAM (and not the clips, the tape)
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2131539854655700584&hl=en
Over here......
If he's got his trading post staked out, why would he bother taking controversial positions, as he had in the last year?
Murtha and many other corrupt politcians are not ashamed of an article like this, this is the way they are accustomed to doing business. These types have to be booted and new people like Diana Irey voted in.
Thanks for the ping BTLD.
This article appeared in my newspaper in w. Pennsylvania today. Local Dims will probably admire his methods.
Yes, the NYT also ran it and it's on Diana Irey's Website.
I had to keep checking the source to make sure I wasn't reading a chapter out of 'The Godfather'.
Thank you for the ping. I've seen another article just like this but not as detailed.
Good comparison and when you think back over the last 40 or more years that's the way the House has been run, dog eat dog.
Isn't it something. Pelosi grew up that way. Read an article where her dad kept the equivalent of a food pantry, and had folks sign the equivalent of a chit. Then, the chits came due come election time.
That's interesting. I'll have to do a search and see what I can find out about that, but from the little you said it sure explains a lot.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.