Redstate

My, Aren't We Decisive?

By Pejman Yousefzadeh Posted in Democrats | Featured Stories — Comments (2) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »

So Nancy Pelosi does the right thing and refuses to make Alcee Hastings the Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee (read on):

The fight over the top spot on the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence has exposed the kind of factional politics that bedeviled House Democrats before they were swept from control in 1994. Harman, a moderate, strong-on-defense "Blue Dog" Democrat, had angered liberals with her reluctance to challenge the Bush administration's use of intelligence. Hastings, an African American, was strongly backed by the Congressional Black Caucus but was ardently opposed by the Blue Dogs, who said his removal from the bench disqualifies him from such a sensitive post.

Complicating the matter was Pelosi's relationship with black Democrats. Earlier this year, she enraged the Black Caucus by removing one of its members, Rep. William J. Jefferson (D-La.), from the Ways and Means Committee after court documents revealed that federal investigators looking into allegations of bribery had found $90,000 in cash neatly bundled in his freezer.

Instead of picking Harman or Hastings, Pelosi will look for a compromise candidate, probably Rep. Silvestre Reyes (D-Tex.), but possibly Rep. Norman D. Dicks (D-Wash.), a hawkish member of the Appropriations defense subcommittee, or Rep. Sanford Bishop (D-Ga.), a conservative African American with experience on the intelligence committee. To entice Harman to run in 2000 for a House seat she had vacated for an unsuccessful bid for the California governorship, the Democratic leadership shunted Bishop off the committee -- another perceived slap at black lawmakers.

In announcing her decision, Pelosi praised Hastings. "Alcee Hastings has always placed national security as his highest priority," she said. "He has served our country well, and I have full confidence that he will continue to do so."

Reminders of just how well Hastings has "served our country" can be found here and here. It is, of course, reassuring to read that Hastings will not chair the Intelligence Committee, but one cannot help but wonder why Speaker-to-be Pelosi hesitated so long before informing Hastings that he would not be entrusted with a gavel in his hand. Given that Hastings once had a gavel in hand as a federal judge and used the opportunity to indulge in corruption rather than practice justice and bring dignity to himself, to the federal court system and to the laws of the United States, it should have been an easy call from the outset to say that Hastings would not be allowed to chair the Intelligence Committee.

And yet, we were actually kept in suspense regarding the issue. Astonishing. I am willing to posit that if the ethically challenged John Murtha had been able to ride Nancy Pelosi's backing and active campaigning to victory in his own race for the position of House Majority Leader, Pelosi, flush with power, would have likely felt comfortable enough to back Hastings for the chairmanship. Murtha's failure as a candidate and the resulting negative publicity regarding the incoming Speaker's devotion to changing the "culture of corruption" likely did the Hastings candidacy in more than anything else. In a better world, the Hastings candidacy would have been dead in the water from the moment that it was announced as a possibility.