Pelosi, Hastings and Harman: oh, my...
Welcome to the fishbowl, Rep. Pelosi.
By Moe Lane Posted in Congress — Comments (12) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
TCS gets nicely to the point (Via Glenn):
With majority status in the "people's house" comes a share in responsibility for the security of the Republic. This is why we are so concerned about a shadow which darkens presumptive Speaker Pelosi's triumphant morning, a shadow which will only grow longer if she allows it to begin appearing prominently in the media coverage of the global war on terrorism, metastasizing into her first "intelligence failure" even before she takes the gavel from outgoing Speaker Hastert. That is the shadow of Alcee Lamar Hastings, the reelected Democratic Representative from Florida's 23rd District.
Mr. Hastings was, in the outgoing 109th Congress, the second-ranked Democrat on the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence. But the Washington Post's Charles Babington first reported more than a year ago, in a story that has never been denied (indeed, it has been confirmed in the congressman's hometown newspaper, the Miami Herald) that Ms. Pelosi plans to replace the committee's current ranking Democrat, California Representative Jane Harman, with Mr. Hastings who would be installed as committee chairman when the 110th Congress begins. The move would be a payback to the Congressional Black Caucus, to whose support Pelosi owes her election as Minority Leader and whose members she angered by picking Ms. Harman to be ranking member over Georgia Rep. Sanford Bishop in 2003. The incoming Speaker must also mollify the Black Caucus for having pushed Louisiana Rep. William Jefferson (he of the frozen cash) off the Ways and Means Committee.
We have difficulty accepting that Mr. Hastings has been allowed by Ms. Pelosi to venture anywhere near national security matters, much less onto a field as vital as the Intelligence Committee, which exercises oversight of organizations ranging from Central Intelligence Agency to the U.S. Marine Corps Intelligence Department, including the Defense Intelligence Agency and the National Security Agency. That Mr. Hastings is employed by the United States of America, and is not a guest a federal penitentiary, is itself cause for wonder.
Read on.
Now, let's establish several things here. First off, Representative Pelosi has not actually said for the record who will get the chair, one way or the other; there are rumors, but nothing official. Second, my party's ability to determine House Committee chairs will come to an abrupt end on January 3rd. Third, once Representative Pelosi actually takes the gavel and becomes Speaker of the House it will be her privilege and pleasure to appoint anyone elgible that she blessed well pleases.
But she is not yet Speaker of the House; and as that position is an elected position (by the House at large, to be sure) it is incumbent on those seeking it to answer such legitimate questions that might occur to either the Members of Congress or the citizenry that elected them. Questions such as:
* Is it true that Rep. Pelosi plans to grant to a critical House Committee chair to a man whom she voted in 1988 to impeach as being unworthy to hold his federal judgeship?
* If it is not true, is she prepared to put an end to this line of questioning?
* If it is true, does she regret her 1988 vote? Or has she been persuaded that circumstances have changed with regard to Rep. Hastings?
* If she has been so persuaded, can she articulate what caused her to change her mind?
Of course, I am merely a private citizen belong to the soon-to-be minority party; she may ignore me as being beneath her dignity. That unfortunate fact will not do a single thing to reduce the pertinence and and importance of the above questions... and if it is merely my pleasure to ask, it is now the pleasure and duty of members of the majority party to do the same. Unless, of course, they actually do want a man impeached on bribery and corruption charges to serve as the next House Chair on Intelligence - or they simply do not care.
In either case, they should come out and say so, too.
« Rep. Capuano's Newspeak for Censorship — Comments (5) | Hastert out as Leader of Republicans — Comments (21) »
Pelosi, Hastings and Harman: oh, my... 12 Comments (0 topical, 12 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »
...in the House; so, yeah, they do. She can only count on a 11 vote majority overall, though - and a lot of those newbies are supposed to be fairly conservative*. Which makes this a puzzler; a 12 vote defection is just as good as a 35 vote one...
All of which is, of course, her problem.
Moe
The Fuzzy Puppy of the VRWC.
*Local Republicans, take note: hometown papers have both the right and inclination to ask whether their new Representatives would support giving Hastings the Intelligence chair.
Nancy is absolutely cornered on this one. If she does the sane thing and appoint Harman, the CBC will go nuts. If she appoints Alcee Hastings the country will go nuts at her utter contempt for national security. Hastings is the last person in the 435 member body who should even be in Congress, not to mention chairing the Intelligence Committee! (I struggled to avoid all caps)
Her only middle ground is to appoint Sanford Bishop.
Of course, it is great politics for us if Hastings actually does become chair. Although I would be terrified to have that criminal in such a key position in the war on terror.
Sheila Jackson Lee is not without her shortcomings, but of all the CBC members, I might trust her the most to be chair of the House Intelligence Committee.
Either one is scary, but at least maybe she can use the role on the Intelligence Committee to get the next Mars rover to take pictures of Flag Armstrong planted.
Those conservatives who sat out to "send a message" feel good now. Look at thw damage you have wrought.
Nov 7, 2006 was a day of shame for those who sat out. You let KOS win.
From the stuff I've seen the problem was not so much conservatives staying home as indies voting D. I haven't seen anything that is really worth analyzing, but I'd like to see something if it's out there anywhere.
_______________________________
If "pro" is the opposite of "con", what is the opposite of "progress"?
A conservative web site posted the following, supposedly from a capitol hill source. It gives a different reason why Harman supposedly won't get the job.
Democratic Party sources said as House Speaker, Ms. Pelosi plans to block moves that would place hawks into important chairmanships. The sources said a key casualty would be Rep. Jane Harman, a six-term member of Congress who has cooperated with Republicans on the House Intelligence Committee.
"Nancy Pelosi wants total party discipline," a source in the Democratic Party leadership said. "If you played ball with the Republicans during this session, then you're not going to be given an important chair in the next session."
The media will remain quiet on Pelosi driving the daggers into Jane Harman whereas they savaged the some in the GOP for having second thoughts on Specter. Predictable, but astonishingly sick at the same time. At least none of us were calling for replacing Specter with anyone anywhere near the level of incompetence (criminality?) as Alcee Hastings. It's almost like we were gaming to replace Specter with Bob Taft, were he a member of the Senate and not an incredibly incompetent governor.
"I could explain, but that would be very long, very convoluted, and make you look very stupid. Nobody wants that... except maybe me."
Wow, this is starting already. After the efforts they made to hide their leadership team the last month, I'm surprised they are coming out like this already.
The most powerful thing we have against these people is their own words and their own deeds. If we keep the light on them, people will develop more than just a dislike for these characters before 2008. As part of that, I've put together www.scorchedblue.blogspot.com as a place to collect information about the Democratic leaders and to expose them when they betray their voters - as they will very soon and often.
--Alan
The capaign for 2008 starts today, and Republicans need to learn how to fight. www.scorchedblue.blogspot.com
First of all, does the CBC have the votes to prevent her from becoming Speaker? If not, then she can always walk away from whatever demands the CBC might have. In this case, she can negotiate with the CBC to find some way to satisfy them without having to appoint Hastings to the House Intelligence Chair. Hastings himself won't like it, but in the end, he's just one member of the House.
Secondly, even if you got to ask Speaker-elect Pelosi those questions, who would get to hear the answers? The press just finished winning Queen Pelosi her crown, and they're not rip it off her head until it's time to crown Hillary.