Murtha: Will His Anti-War Stance Be Enough?

For good reasons, progressives are split on whether House Speaker-to-be Nancy Pelosi's endorsement of Rep. John Murtha, D-Pa., as the next House majority leader is brilliant or bone-headed. Many activists who are sitting on the sidelines and concluding it makes no difference whether Murtha or the current House minority whip, Rep. Steny Hoyer, D-Md., gets the job are probably right. Both of them bring strong negatives to the job, and progressives will have to keep a firm hold on either of them if the Democratic party is to be the party of common-good politics rather than a pale reflection of Republican conservative cronyism.

Still, Pelosi's endorsement of Murtha is especially disturbing to people who believe that the majority leader must represent more than a courageous voice on a single issue, no matter how important. In many ways Murtha, in Congress since 1969, represents -- proudly -- the old ways Congress has done business that were rejected by disgusted voters earlier this month. As leading Democrat on the powerful House Appropriations Committee's defense subcommittee, he was unabashed in his embrace of the horse-trading of legislative favors endemic in that committee: ''You just need to get the things done, so you give them the votes to get the things done,'' he said in an October interview in The New York Times. ''There is no question that 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.''

The projects Murtha is referring to take the form of "earmarks" in appropriations bills -- designated federal funding for specific projects that are frequently tucked into bills at the behest of lobbyists and more often than not happen outside of public scrutiny. Democratic leaders have vowed to at least put some sunlight on the earmarking process by forcing them to be spelled out in clear language in bills and forcing members to attach their name to earmarks they request, but Murtha has not embraced those reforms. Plus, as the Times reported, Murtha's bartering of votes with the Republicans in exchange for legislative favors has proven costly for several key Democratic imperatives, such as an effort by Democrats to force an investigation of contracting fraud in Iraq.

If any committee is in need of a thorough ethical scrubbing, it is the Appropriations Committee, which incubated the scandal that forced Republican Rep. Randy "Duke" Cunningham out of office and into a federal prison. The chairman of that committee, Rep. Jerry Lewis, is currently under federal investigation for using his post to steer contracts to former Appropriations Committee staff members , and that has even some House Republicans questioning whether he should stay on the committee as ranking minority member in the next Congress.

And a report from Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington highlights ethics vulnerabilities that Murtha has that go well beyond his being an unindicted co-conspirator in the Abscam bribery scandal in 1980. His brother, Robert "Kit" Murtha, is a registered lobbyist for KSA Consulting, which directly lobbied Murtha's office on behalf of seven companies which received a total $20.8 million in earmarks. Robert Murtha was hired by a KSA official, Carmen Scialabba, who was a longtime Murtha staffer. Another former Murtha staff member, Paul Magliocchetti, opened a lobbying firm that succeeded in getting some $95 million for its clients through the 2006 defense appropriations bill, according to CREW; the firm and its clients also happen to be among the top contributors to Murtha's re-election campaign.

There is also the fact that Murtha has been significantly worse than his Democratic colleagues in supporting President Bush and opposing his own Democratic leadership, while Hoyer has been a far more loyal to Democratic policy position. A voting analysis by Congressional Quarterly shows that in 2005 Murtha supported President Bush on 38 percent of his votes, far more than the 24 percent of the time Hoyer supported Bush. And while Hoyer voted for the Democratic position on bills at least 9 out of every 10 votes since President Bush has been in office, Republicans have been able to count on Murtha bolting from the party at least 20 percent and as much as 34 percent of the time.