Hoyer is a dipshit.

Murtha- no question.

I'm not a Murtha-head (my impression is that he's a little too military-industrial complex for me), but he's better than Hoyer. By a good amount.

I'm going for a Majority leader that can't be wedged away from the Speaker when the Replicants are being mischievous.

link

To have a more intelligent opinion on this, I need more insight than I have about what a Majority Leader does -- in a Democratic party style. We're in new terrain here.

How about the one who isn't trying to start a Democratic K-Street Project?

How about the one who isn't going to take Rahm Emanuels douchbaggery?

If the Progressive Netroots has problems with Pelosi and Emanuel, than lord have mercy are we going to have problems with Hoyer.

In fact, I'd go so far that Majority Leader Hoyer will be to the Progressive Netroots as Majority Leader Byrd was to Americans for Democratic Action and the Sierra Club.

on all things progressive and that will provide fodder for the commercial media looking to report on conflict.  It will also fuel the rightwing noise machine looking for proof that Pelosi is an ultra radical liberal.

If it's down to those two options, I'd certainly pick Murtha.  He's at least loyal to Pelosi, and is right on the most important issue of the day and not afraid to stand up and fight.

Hoyer is a jerk who has stabbed Pelosi in the back before, and is probably the biggest K-street Dem there is.

I don't agree with Murtha on a lot of issues (then again, I don't agree with Hoyer on a lot, either), but it'd be good to show a united front on the main issue of the day (Iraq), while also showing that we're such a big-tent party that one of the most liberal and one of the most conservative Dems in the House are in the top two leadership posts.

I know Hoyer- he is a party/institution man who is overcautious. Truly a good guy but not inspiring and definitely unwilling to stir things. I know little of Murtha but he impressed me with his courage. However, he is always been a Pentagon man and I wonder if he is willing to defund some of the more exotic and ridiculous expenditures- right now - it is a strong lean for Murtha.

She is not likely to let the public in on it but you can bet she has her preference and is working hard to effect it.  As a management issue, it seems to me that her preference would be important in building a strong team.

Murtha will be more powerful when it comes to Defense appropriations if he doesn't get the Majority Leader position.

Of course- both Murtha and Dicks (if Murtha gets Majority Leader, Dicks will be the defense cardinal) will continue to steamroll Defense pork through. It's up to Dems on the full Appropriations committee to slow them down.

Pelosi wants Murtha- undoubtedly. Murtha is part of her inner circle, Hoyer ran against her for whip in 01. And from what I hear about her, Pelosi isn't quick to forgive.

Between the two of them, I'm for Murtha... both on issues of substance and appearance. I just don't feel that I can trust Hoyer in the same way.

If we get Murtha, then we've an opportunity to turn months of anti-Murtha propaganda on their head. We'll be making it clear, with regards to defense, that we regard the well-being of our troops as much more important than the administration's desire for a Middle Eastern hegemony.

This morning, I contacted my rep (Barbara Lee) to find out where her support is, there, and to express my feelings about Murtha. I haven't had a response yet.

Murtha

so he can be more help to PA dems, who needs it and challengers like Tony Barr.

I like Murtha. But what does everyone think about this:

http://www.beyonddelay.org/summaries/mur tha.php

I'm not saying there's a lot to it, but the corruption issue was big in the election. I want to see the Democrats play it super squeaky clean.

Not having strong feelings one way or another, this would tip me towards Hoyer.

Murtha, but not happily.

Hoyer is a divisive force.  Murtha may be much more conservative than I am on a lot of issues, but on Iraq, where it counts most, he has been stellar.  He is loyal to Pelosi and would help her move a cohesive agenda.  There is no question, IMHO.

What I want is a more moderate leader to balance Pelosi, but one who won't undermine the party and her leadership. As Markos just said, Murtha is a Pelosi loyalist, and that's a big plus for me. He doesn't have to be as liberal as she is, just as long as he's not stabbing her in the back on national TV.

Plus, we know we can make a lot of reforms on domestic issues, but if we can fix a lot of Iraq in the next two years, no GOP presidential candidate will have a leg to stand on. Murtha would bring every possible measure of credibility on Iraq issues.

Murtha - he's earned it.

Hoyer, as others have stated, is a congressional operator through and through. He stands for the House in a business-as-usual fashion, but he's already signed off on the modest lobbying reforms that Pelosi has put forward.

That being said, I don't think Hoyer would stab Pelosi in the back as others have stated-the two have, from what I've read, put aside past differences some and you have to admit they performed extremely well as minority leader and whip. Even in a farked up House like the Republicans ran in the 108th and 109th, Pelosi and Hoyer kept the minority together very well.

He's not great in my book. He's not really bad though, either.

Murtha, though-ugh, yuck,ugh. Huge pork earmarking for defense industries lobbied for by your own siblings just flat out STINKS. It smells and reeks of the Republican congress that just got booted to the curb and right now we need to air out this legislative outhouse, not fill it up with our own shit.

I have another problem with Murtha being from the South. This is the first majority that, in a very, very long time, does not include a ton of Southern districts as part of its makeup. I'm tired of the South's terrible approach to governance having such a huge influence on the American political culture as a whole and I'd rather have some midwest, Western, or Mid-Atlantic sensibility in place of the reactionary social conservatism and mangled economic haphazardness that defines Southern politics.

I've already urged my Congressman David Price (D-NC) to vote for Hoyer, provided no new candidates step up.

Look at the two comments--which one is direct and straight to the point, and which one is your standard political "I can't commit myself to anything"?

Style isn't necessarily substance, but Murtha put his career on the line on Iraq long before the wave of anti-war sentiment got high. We need a straightshooter with Pentagon connections if we're going to get out of the chaos in Iraq at all.

We elect members of congress, but they should elect their leaders without pressure from us.

Of course, we have our opinions. For my part, I would like to know what Pelosi thinks. Clearly, if she doesn't want Hoyer in the job, it would be very stupid to put him there. But Hoyer is a company guy to the core.

Murtha is 74; Hoyer, 67. Both are "Mr. Inside" types, but Murtha has become a bit of lightning rod. Hoyer has a more liberal voting record although with Pelosi on top, I don't where that matters much.

The job is Hoyer's on the natural, and I don't think the Whip should be passed over without a compelling reason.

The main job of the Leader is to count votes with supreme accuracy; the main job of the Whip is to enforce party loyalty. Both Hoyer and Murtha know and like many of the GOP members, which is essential to accurate vote counting, but I think Hoyer is better at it.

Murtha would not be a bad choice for Whip if only because he's so goddamn scary. "Hey, screw you, Jack, I'm voting with the Republicans"?  I might say that, but only at a distance.

The other obvious Whip candidate is Rahm, intimidating for other reasons.

Murtha is a nice contrast to Pelosi.

When it comes to social issues, and on the military-industrial complex, Hoyer is marginally better. On ethics and campaign finance, they're about the same.

On everything else, however, Murtha is LEAGUES better.

i would agree with the pro-murtha sentiments here (especially the argument that at least he's better than hoyer), but isn't his moral authority undercut by the well-substantiated accusations that he runs the pay-to-play game with pork?

Steny Hoyer is an out-of-touch, beltway-appeasing DINO and is detrimental to the Democratic Party and the progressive cause.
He's a wimp and we need real strength here for this position.

John Murtha can give us strength and he also a tough talking guy who won't be easily cowed into retreat or put up with any swiftboating from the Bill O'Reilly's and Ann Coulter's out there either.

We must all support John Murtha!

Hoyer sealed it for me when I watched him argue on the floor in the Terry Schiavo mess. Strong, eloquent, strategic, formibable. I respect Murtha's stand, but I don't see him as a strategic leader. Hoyer's my pick.

Murtha is a Pelosi loyalist and is conservative so he can talk with the blue dogs. He seems like a great intermediary between the two wings of the party.

We don't want the blue dogs enabling Bush. (We have Joe for that.)

On social issues, Hoyer does have an advantage over Murtha.  But Murtha to me appears stronger and has a backbone.  Hoyer's backstabbed Pelosi quite a bit and Murtha seems to want to help the party better...

I don't generally support Murtha's positions on the social issues..but the question is does that really matter?

I think I'll go with him.  would like to know everyone elses thoughts.

Murtha all the way.  Hoyer's refusal to whip the bankruptcy bill put him on my permanent blacklist.

Hoyer's Campaign to Undermine Dems & Topple Pelosi

"...Then, while Pelosi works to resist the influence of corporate interests as she goes after the GOP's "culture of corruption," it is Hoyer who is deliberately landing stories in newspapers about his efforts to formalize his own system of legalized bribery - putting his own campaign wallet ahead of Democrats' efforts to develop a message of reform. Today in Roll Call, for instance, it was Hoyer who placed the story that details his efforts to "woo K Street" (aka. the corporate lobbying community). The story notes he convened a meeting of "50 business-minded Democratic consultants, lobbyists and corporate officers to get them to commit to writing checks." And in case you didn't think Hoyer was trying to land these stories - just check out his website where he brazenly displays a similar story, as if his corporate shakedown operation is a trophy to be marveled at - and not an albatross that directly undermines his party's message.

Finally, it has been Hoyer who has made a point of actively working against Pelosi on major congressional votes. You remember, it was Hoyer - the Democratic Whip - who refused to whip votes together to try to defeat the corporate-written Central American Free Trade Agreement. When Pelosi tried to build opposition to the disgusting bankruptcy bill, it was Hoyer, the second-ranking Democrat in the House, who not only didn't whip against the bankruptcy bill, but actually voted for it, after pocketing massive campaign contributions from the banking industry. While Pelosi was taking a stand by voting against the Iraq War, Hoyer was voting for the Iraq War. And when Pelosi worked to keep her caucus together in opposing the GOP Energy Bill, it was Hoyer who voted for the nauseating legislation after pocketing more than $300,000 from energy/natural resource industry cash. That legislation that literally gave away billions of taxpayer dollars to the energy industry profiteers who proceeded to bilk Americans with higher and higher gas prices..."

Hoyer's stance on lobbyist reform sucks. I think he's okaaaay overall, but I'd prefer Murtha.

On MSNBC on election night Murtha told Tweety that he had the votes lined up and needed to talk to the new members. He seemed mighty confident.

I think the key is who will maintain and enforce discipline in the caucus. Meaning that on the most important battles they vote in unison. Who will not stab the the Dems in the back? We don't need a Lieberliar in a top job?

Yes, he's socially conservative, but since we're in charge now, none of those godawful bills will ever see the light of day.

Besides, the man probably wants to be majority leader for the sole reason of getting our troops out of Iraq. Think about how old he is - he isn't going to be in a leadership position forever. If he can facilitate our departure from Iraq, then it is definitely in our best interest to have him be Majority Leader.

They're both smooth corporate porkbarrel earmark masters. If either of them call for an end to earmarks I'd support that guy.

I have to say the corruption issue bothers me a bit with regard to Murtha.  While I respect Murtha's stand on Iraq (obviously), having a majority leader who has been tainted by scandal (even if minor compared to the many in the GOP) seems rather undesirable at the moment.

On the other hand, if Hoyer is going to undercut Pelosi, that is probably worse.  But if he is going to be a team player, he seems like the better choice to me.

As I said before- John Lewis I believe would be our best choice for Majority Leader- we should have person of color as our number 2, he's part of the progressive caucus, he's already the Senior Chief Deputy Whip, which is No. 6, I believe, and he's certainly eloquent and well-spoken.

Another good one would be Rosa DeLauro- progressive and a talented politician.

That said, if we can't get either of them, then Murtha is the way.

I wanted to know both candidates posistions on abortion, gay rights, and the enviornment before making up my mind and here is what I found out from the NARAL, League of Conservation Voters (LCV), and Human Rights Campaign (HRC) scorecards:
           HRC     NARAL     LCV
Murtha     63%       0%      58%
Hoyer      88%     100%      100%

To be more clear, this means that Murtha voted against allowing military servicewoman to obtain abortions at overseas military hospitals -- even if they pay for it with their own money and he voted to cut contraception from the list of services offered to poor women overseas.

I guess based on issues that I would support Hoyer, though not enthusiastically.

Are these our only two options? Ugh.

Home state loyalty kicks in. Hoyer all the way.

Interesting, my candidate, Mahoney, owes a lot to both these guys.  Both Hoyer and Murtha did events for Mahoney in Florida long before the Foley mess.  

Murtha deserves something.  A brave, tough guy who has led the charge against our involvement in this insane war.  

Any chance we'll be getting a door number 3?

Hoyer is not a team player, he thinks about what's best for him first.

If Pelosi trust Murtha then we should too.

Washington monthly backgrounder on Hoyer who's news to me.

I like the schmoozer aspect. If we're to do anything good, it's a multi-year plan that involves solidifying the majority but also building a working governing consensus that includes members of the GOP. Hoyer may be good in that respect.

Still, I like the idea of Murtha as the public face of the Democrats' Iraq Policy.

Where were the two of them in terms of spending campaign cash and supporting Dem challegers?  Neither are on the use it or lose it list... but Murtha demolished his opponent, and hoyer only had a green party opponent.

you all are not going to like this comment.  But Murtha has some corruption problem of his own.  Just cuz someone agrees with you, does not mean that they do not have deep ethical problems.

we do not want to make the mistakes the republicans did

Both of them are scaryy in my opinion...Hoyer will embolden the blue dogs bastards and you will see a lot of cross over votes that would probably kill our liberal causes.

Murtha  is as corrupt as tom delay and sold his soul for porks..I dont think we need a mini tom delay.

Any third choice?? and im not talking rham emmanuel because he's another blue dog DLC enabler.

What about the black caucus guy? is he available..id rather have him to be majority leader.

Anyway, between hoyer and murtha, which one of them support the comprehensive immigration reform and which one dont support it..Supposrting comprehensive immigration reform will gain votes from the hispanic caucus members.

you buy the popcorn, and I'll save your seat.  This should be fun

Murtha.  I wasn't sure about this until I saw CNN a bit ago.  Murtha helped Pelosi campaign for her leadership positions, against -- get this -- Hoyer.

Yeah, Murtha has earmark baggage.  Yeah, he's only viable on the left because he's come out against this war.  But he's a great big huge knuckle-busting guy, and I don't think he's going to take any guff from anyone if Ms. Pelosi asks him to get something done.

So: Murtha.

I've read through all the comments, and appreciate the discussion. However, I haven't heard anyone mention how either one feels about IMPEACHMENT

I know Pelosi's against it. Both Murtha & Hoyer sound like blue dogs to me, so they're probably both against it, too. But does anyone know for sure??

Pelosi really misses the ball here, because she thinks that impeachment is only Bush bashing and vengeance. If so, she is WRONG! Way wrong. Impeachment is about DEFENDING OUR CONSTITUTION! This is the main thing that gets me mad against Pelosi. She has such an irritating dismissive, adamant way of dismissing impeachment talk and ruling it out a priori. I want to hire a bee that will buzz "Impeachment!" into her ear for the next year until she allows it.

Bob in HI

  I'm glad they said this.  But here's what they mean when they say "impeachment is off the table:"  "impeachment is off the table until Henry Waxman launches large-scale investigations into Republican corruption and deceit, and finds obviously impeachable offenses."  

Bob- come on. Pelosi's not against impeachment. It's called avoiding a media fiasco two weeks before the election.

Every member of Congress has or is harboring secret dreams about being President. Do you think Nancy Pelosi is any different?

She knows that impeachment would lead to her being the first woman President.

If impeachment becomes politically viable for a majority of Congress (with Henry Waxman at Government Reform, John Conyers at Judiciary, and Levin at Investigations and Armed Services, I'm pretty sure it will) than Pelosi will support it.

Hoyer would be a terrible choice because of his K-Street involvements.  

Murtha would work well with the Blue Dog Dems and many moderate Republicans.  

Murtha already is a very popular face of the Democratic Party against the war in Iraq.  

Murtha also has demonstrated real backbone and strength in not backing down against attacks from O'Reilly and Limbaugh, etc.  

Murtha is great with the media and would be very good at clearly stating Democratic Party positions.  

And if Nancy Pelosi likes him...  well, give the gal what she wants!

It strikes me as troublesome that many of the folks posting to this discussion are 1) unclear as to how this election works; 2) do not fully understand the nature of the job of Majority Leader; and 3) do not understand that the jobs of Majority Leader and Majority Whip are two different jobs, and that the loser of the Leader's race becomes the Whip.  Let me try to clarify:

1) The elections for party leadership positions are conducted by secret ballot with each member of the caucus getting one vote. This is purely an internal process, and what of this process is in sight of the public is highly limited.  Its worth noting that this is very different that the election of the Speaker - an election which is conducted in public view on the floor of the House, and each member of the House (both parties) vote for their choice. In general a member must announce his intent to run for a leadership position (although not required), and then run a full campaign among his/her colleages.  

2) The job of Majority Leader is to serve as the "floor leader" or party leader of the majority party. The Leader's office manages the caucus on a daily basis, enforces the party's rules, and serves as a "chief partisan" and cheerleader.  The Leader is the chief stratigist, spokesman, and face of the party.  This should not be confused with the job of the Speaker, who is in fact the leader of the entire House.  While certainly a partisan job, the Speakership carries the additional responsibilites of managing the institution (remember, the House is a huge organization with in excess of 14,000 staff working for the members, committees, support organizations, libraries, counsel, and so forth) itself, and everything (litterally) on the south side of the Capitol complex on behalf of both parties. In fact, once a matter of rule and now more a matter of tradition, the Speaker of the House generally refrains from speaking on the floor in support or opposition of an issue and also generally refrains from voting. (Note, the Speaker is still a member of the House and has all the rights to speak and vote, but as the head of the whole organization, often does not). There is no question that the role of the Speaker is as the formal leader of the majority party, but my point here is the job is much larger than that alone. The Speaker is the command authority of the House, with near full control over almost all aspects of opperation and legislative activity. Of course all of this is very dependent on the personalities involved...many keen observers would note that in many ways DeLay was far more powerful than Hastert, regardless of the fact that Hastert's job has more specific authority.

3) Finally - the job of Whip does not go to whoever get's second place.  The Democratic Caucus will elect its Majority Whip in the same manner it will elect the Leader.  At the moment there is only one member who has announced his intent to run for the position, and that is Congressman Jim Clyburn of South Carolina. Congressman Clyburn is currently the Chairman of the Democratic Conference, which is the third-ranking position in the current leadership. For those who may not know him, Congressman Clyburn is an African-American member from the SC 6th, with a voting record that would make any progressive proud.

After reading all of the above comments, it sounds like we could use another candidate.  Are the choices limited to Murtha and Hoyer, or is there a chance that someone else will campaign for the position?

It's not a great choice, but based on two things (1. The enemy of my enemy - Rahm Emanuel - is my friend and 2. Steny's support for the bankruptcy bill), I'm going to have to say Pork Barrel Jack.

Both are awful choices.  Hoyer did a pathetic job as whip, as can be shown by the dem minority's inability to block anything.  Murtha, on the other hand, opposes basic Democratic platform issues and has also undercut the party consistently.  Why isn't John Conyers a choice?  Or Barney Frank?  Their both plenty senior. Lewis might be a good choice as well.  Hell, Rahm might even be better than the two being put forward.  

About Pelosi, the grassroots and generally being a Dem.

Murtha has been an insider who wasn't with the liberals, but he's never been a deliberately disloyal fucktard, right?

Murtha is my guy,

At this point I am supporting Murtha largely because of this excellent observation by Mathew Yglesias.

http://www.matthewyglesias.com/archives/ 2006/11/how_quickly_we_forget/

I would like to see Murtha and Hoyer do a bloggers.tv session where they talk supply us some more depth about their candidacy. The introductions included above are nice but I am sure each candidate has much more to offer than the above snippets.

I've known Hoyer for years. He's smart and a good politician, but you can't trust him. He does what's expedient. Also, he has no principles - he just votes what benefits him. He is VERY ambitious and has been since college. He will stab Pelosi in the back - guaranteed.

Pelosi needs someone she can trust, and we all know she doesn't trust or like him. After all, she was born and raised in Maryland and knows all about Hoyer.

Pelosi needs the Majority Leader that SHE wants - not who we want. We need to support her, whoever she backs.

I must apologize for not being as familiar with Hoyer as I should have been.

This article has convinced me that a Hoyer Majority leadership would be a disaster for the populous movement that has contributed so much for the recent national changes in the legislature.

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/feature s/2006/0611.roth.html

If Steny wants the job he is going to have to apply some of that famous polish to his relationship to the blogsphere. I don't know this is possible given his outrageous support for the bankruptcy bill.

Hoyer has many strengths but has clearly not positioned himself for the new realities that we have all worked so hard to bring about.

At this point I am now completely for Murtha. Corporate and Lobbying reform must be a priority of this congress. Given the naked partisanship displayed by ABC with the PT-911 debacle, and the 100 corps blacklisting Air America among them Proctor and Gamble a Hoyer speakership would be a waste of the opportunity we have helped to create.

It's Murtha.

Whom has Hoyer ever pissed off?

Believe me, I grant you Murtha's terrible on the issues, and terrible on pork.  Even worse (considering the job), he is often downright awful in interviews.  (In my experience, interviews of him that look good in transcript are cringe-inducing watched in person.)

But Murtha has shown that if something needs to get done, he's willing to piss people off to get it done.

Maybe Hoyer would be willing, too, but he's never shown it.  Why take chances?

Americans want a fighter, and they want one yesterday.  Murtha has shown he is one.  

Too bad there wasn't a poll attached. Murtha = loyal to Pelosi = the choice (imho)

I don't know jack about Hoyer, but Murtha got a 'dishonorable mention' in CREW's "Beyond Delay - 20 Most Corrupt Members of Congress (And 5 to Watch)". Apparently, he's been handing out tax dollars to his brother's (a lobbyist) clients using his position as head of the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee of the House Appropriations Committee. He's also given a lot of business to clients of the PMA group, who have in turn become one of Murtha's biggest contributors. I don't care how well respected he is, if he's corrupt, he's not the guy for me.

Link to Report: Beyond Delay