posted
WASHINGTON - House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is defending a close Democratic ally whom Republicans want to reprimand for threatening a GOP lawmaker's spending projects.
Pelosi, D-Calif., said she had "no idea what actually happened" during a noisy exchange in the House chamber last week between Reps. John P. Murtha, D-Pa., and Mike Rogers, R-Mich.
"What I do know is that Congressman Murtha has — enjoys — an excellent reputation in the Congress on both sides of the aisle," said Pelosi in a broadcast interview taped Friday and aired Sunday.
"He writes the defense appropriation bill in a bipartisan way each year and with the complete involvement of the Republicans as to who gets what on the Republican side," she said.
Murtha is a 35-year House veteran who leads the House Appropriations subcommittee on military spending. He is known for a fondness for earmarks — carefully targeted spending items placed in appropriations bills to benefit a specific lawmaker or favored constituent group.
During a series of House votes Thursday, Murtha walked to the GOP side to confront Rogers, a former FBI agent. This month, Rogers had tried unsuccessfully to strike from an intelligence spending bill an item that would restore $23 million for the National Drug Intelligence Center, a facility in Murtha's Pennsylvania district.
According to Rogers' account, which Murtha did not dispute, the Democrat angrily told Rogers he should never seek earmarks of his own because "you're not going to get any, now or forever."
"This was clearly designed to try to intimidate me," Rogers told The Associated Press on Friday. "He said it loud enough for other people to hear."
House rules prohibit lawmakers from placing conditions on earmarks or targeted tax benefits that are based on another member's votes.
Murtha's office said in a statement: "The committee and staff give every Democrat and Republican the same consideration. We have extensive hearings and every request is given careful consideration. We will continue to do just that."
-------------------- One is never completely useless. One can always serve as a bad example. Posts: 2430 | From: CA | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
House Republicans seek a reprimand for Murtha
By Jerome L. Sherman, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
WASHINGTON -- A GOP lawmaker is accusing Pennsylvania Rep. John Murtha of threatening him with political retaliation after House Republicans unsuccessfully tried to cut off funding for the National Drug Intelligence Center in Johnstown.
Rep. Michael Rogers, R-Mich., on Monday will introduce a reprimand motion against Mr. Murtha, one of the most senior lawmakers in Congress and the highest-ranking House member in charge of defense spending.
Mr. Rogers said Mr. Murtha confronted him on the House floor Thursday night, vowing to block federal money for his district, according to a draft of the motion.
"I hope you don't have any earmarks in the defense appropriation bill because they are gone and you will not get any earmarks now and forever," Mr. Murtha allegedly told Mr. Rogers in a "loud voice." He referred to the pet projects lawmakers often tuck into large spending bills.
"This is not the way we do things here," Mr. Rogers replied. "Is that supposed to make me afraid of you?"
"That's the way I do it," Mr. Murtha said.
Mr. Murtha, who chairs the House Defense Appropriations Subcommittee, was unavailable for comment yesterday.
"The committee and staff give every Democrat and Republican the same consideration," his spokesman, Matthew Mazonkey, said in an e-mail message. "We have extensive hearings and every request is given careful consideration. We will continue to do just that."
-------------------- One is never completely useless. One can always serve as a bad example. Posts: 2430 | From: CA | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
Hello, I'm Congressman Mike Rogers from Michigan's 8th District. I am the top Republican on the House Terrorism and Human Intelligence Subcommittee.
I want to talk to you today about a troubling development that occurred in the U.S. House of Representatives this past week – it’s an issue that every hardworking American taxpayer ought to be concerned about.
Last Friday, House Republicans discovered that a Member of Congress had hidden a wasteful earmark -- or pet pork project -- worth tens of millions of dollars into a bill designed to fund America's Intelligence operations.
The hidden earmark was slipped into a bill by Pennsylvania Congressman Jack Murtha; it would have directed tens of millions of dollars toward a government facility in his district that the House Government Reform Committee concluded was both wasteful and unnecessary.
This past week, Republicans put the spotlight on that earmark and called on Democrats to remove it from the Intelligence funding bill.
It comes down to a choice between spies catching terrorists or pork barrel spending in a Congressional District. We are a nation at war, and when we find wasteful spending, we must stop it.
While many of us expected Congressman Murtha to try to defend his earmark, none of us could have predicted what happened next:
Murtha, who has enormous power over defense projects as Chairman of the Defense Subcommittee on Appropriations, came to me on the House floor and said: “You don’t have any earmarks in the appropriations bills now or forever.”
I replied to him that threatening retribution is not the way we do business in Congress.
To which he replied: “That’s the way I do it.”
No Member of Congress should ever be threatened because of his or her efforts to crack down on wasteful spending and protect the interests of taxpayers.
This is exactly why Americans are disgusted with the United States Congress and its out of control spending.
Mr. Murtha’s threat violated more than the House rules – it violated the public’s trust.
As lawmakers, we must have an obligation to shine a spotlight on earmarks and eliminate wasteful spending, as Mr. Murtha’s pet project surely is.
As a former FBI agent who pursued cases of organized crime and public corruption, it is disappointing to see such behavior in the People’s House.
Next week I will be introducing a resolution calling Congressman Murtha to account, and the whole House will have to vote on whether to reprimand him.
This is yet another example of the Democrats abusing the rules of the House and breaking the commitments they made to the American people.
In fact, over the last four months they have not led, nor have they delivered anything remotely close to an open, deliberative, and results-oriented House.
Not surprisingly, not a single substantive piece of House legislation has been enacted into law since January.
Congress’ reputation is at an historic low. And its up to us, and up to you, to insist that Congress must do better by the American people.
I’m Congressman Mike Rogers. Thank you for listening.
-------------------- One is never completely useless. One can always serve as a bad example. Posts: 2430 | From: CA | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
-------------------- One is never completely useless. One can always serve as a bad example. Posts: 2430 | From: CA | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
OMG can't you ever get off your RNC Parrot accusation tit?
I posted this because it disgusts me to see both sides fighting over something that shouldn't be taking place in the first place... Pork Barrel Spending. Of course, I should know better than to expect anything other than false accusations and pompus assumptions from you.
-------------------- One is never completely useless. One can always serve as a bad example. Posts: 2430 | From: CA | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
here's the "pork" that Murtha was accused of earmrking... The National Drug Intelligence Center (NDIC), established in 1993, is a component of the U.S. Department of Justice and a member of the Intelligence Community. The General Counterdrug Intelligence Plan, implemented in February 2000, designated NDIC as the nation's principal center for strategic domestic counterdrug intelligence.
i'm not convinced this is the pork that the GOP was claiming it was NR...
i think it's more political BS..
The National Drug Threat Assessment, NDIC's major intelligence product, is a comprehensive annual report on national drug trafficking and abuse trends within the United States. The assessment identifies the primary drug threat to the nation, monitors fluctuations in consumption levels, tracks drug availability by geographic market, and analyzes trafficking and distribution patterns. The report highlights the most current quantitative and qualitative information on availability, demand, production and cultivation, transportation, and distribution, as well as the effects of a particular drug on abusers and society as a whole.
-------------------- Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise. Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
maybe it is? maybe it isn't... seems it was a Bush Sr creation...LOL
A Drug War Boondoggle The White House wants to kill it, but a little government agency may manage to live on By Bret Schulte Posted 5/1/05
It merits only the briefest of mentions in the president's new budget, but those few lines of type could represent the final chapter in a long and twisted Washington saga. Stashed away on Page 1,181 is a paragraph that would effectively kill the little-known National Drug Intelligence Center, located in Johnstown, Pa., the site of the famous flood of 1889. Bush's budget proposes that the center's $40 million annual budget be slashed to $17 million--just enough to facilitate "the shutdown of the center and transfer of its responsibilities . . . to other Department of Justice elements."
Pork? In the beginning, the Johnstown center did have some friends in the White House. With the blessing of President George Herbert Walker Bush, then drug czar William Bennett proposed the creation of the NDIC in 1990. Its mission: to collect and coordinate intelligence from often-feuding law enforcement agencies in order to provide a strategic look at the war on drugs. But the Drug Enforcement Administration, worried that its pre-eminent role in the drug war was slipping away, openly fought the idea.
Either way, the White House appears to have had it with the NDIC. In its budget report, the Office of Management and Budget says "the proliferation of intelligence centers across the government has not necessarily led to more or better intelligence, but rather more complications in the management of information." For the Johnstown center, it's an ironic coda, then, that the White House is simultaneously supporting a new program--the multiagency Drug Intelligence Fusion Center. Blessed by the DEA, the fusion center will be located in the Washington area. It has already received $25 million from Congress in start-up costs and is slated to open its doors later this year. The idea that a different agency can do the job the NDIC failed to do has left some shaking their heads. "You have to ask, 'What is the master plan?'" said a former official in the office of the drug czar. "The answer is there is no master plan." Proponents say the new agency will succeed because its location makes sense.
In the Senate, Pennsylvania Republican Arlen Specter will fight to keep the center open from his seat on the Appropriations Committee.
LOL... these guys just don't want to have to live in Johnstown...
note the date of this article... '05...
-------------------- Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise. Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Glass, perhaps in this particular case it was not pork, but both parties trade earmarks like a commodity and it's BS IMO...
Murtha's comment about "You don’t have any earmarks in the appropriations bills now or forever."? Just proves my case... What ever happened to term limits anyway? Some of these guys have been in power WAYYY too long.
-------------------- One is never completely useless. One can always serve as a bad example. Posts: 2430 | From: CA | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
It doesn't matter what it is, you plaster that RNC crap and claim it is for information.
If that were the case, why didn't you bother to pull up the facts? It was not a serving of pork, but a primary part of our supposed domestic intellegence and an RNC sanctioned effort Murtha was protecting.
You did it entirely to play a part in the attacks on Murtha because he blew the whistle on the crap the Administratioin has been claiming in Iraq (directions from the RNC talking points).
Posts: 11304 | From: Fort Worth, Texas | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
My point is that NR only cuts and paste crap he gets via the RNC sanctioned propaganda campaign, intended to be (and intended to be by him) slanders on democrats.
NR will tell blatent lies in doiing so, directly or indirectly, as in this case, where he proports to say that it is only Murtha that is involved, while the white hated (according to NR) republican is stopping criminal (again according to NR) behavior, while ignoring the fact that the republican had agreed to not do exactly as he did.
Yes, ignore the fact that the republicans can't be trusted o stick to agreements they made in good faith and break solely as a conspired method of falsely slandering democrats.
Posts: 11304 | From: Fort Worth, Texas | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by glassman: oh i agree about the pork system...
fact is? there should be alot of this "bickering" in a healthy democracy...
It is ok to "bicker" so long as the underlying reason for bickering is legit... which IMO, in the case of earmarks, is not. It is a waste of time and a blatant slap in the face to the American people... regardless of which side of the isle it comes from.
-------------------- One is never completely useless. One can always serve as a bad example. Posts: 2430 | From: CA | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by bdgee: It doesn't matter what it is, you plaster that RNC crap and claim it is for information.
If that were the case, why didn't you bother to pull up the facts? It was not a serving of pork, but a primary part of our supposed domestic intellegence and an RNC sanctioned effort Murtha was protecting.
You did it entirely to play a part in the attacks on Murtha because he blew the whistle on the crap the Administratioin has been claiming in Iraq (directions from the RNC talking points).
Bla bla bla... Your last few posts here are so full of assumptions and false accusations that they do not require refutal, so I won't even bother..... In fact, I'm going to make it a point to never respond to any post you make in which you use your trademark "RNC" phrases.
-------------------- One is never completely useless. One can always serve as a bad example. Posts: 2430 | From: CA | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Man, NR, you as the Great Assumer and Slanderer should speak for yourself!
It is, of course, your standard posting of trash you get, sometimes directly, sometimes second hand through Hannity or Limbaugh or Coulter, or some other bigoted and slanted republican rag or site or program ... Fox news, maybe?) from the RNC talking points and you don't really understand they are vulgar out of place assumptions of warped and slanderous attacks on the good name and reputation of people.
"It is ok to "bicker" so long as the underlying reason for bickering is legit..." and you aren't breaking an agreement not to bicker(unless you are a republican, according to NR, in which case honor isn't required or expected and you may break your word to attack Murtha).
Posts: 11304 | From: Fort Worth, Texas | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
ummm.......I like pork. Although steak is good. I just don't like the bone. The way I figure it anything with a bone, you can get without the bone....Like boneless, skinless chicken breast.
Posts: 1178 | From: Mobile, AL | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
They have bonless buffalo wings. And yes I will eat ribs if my wife takes the pork of the ribs for me. Just think the human race has advanced past the barbaric act of knawing on a bone. Posts: 1178 | From: Mobile, AL | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
Yes, appealing to the morally and intellectually lowest classes in the population and their bigotry.
It isn't only what Limbaugh does best, it is what he does worst too, because it is all he does.
Posts: 11304 | From: Fort Worth, Texas | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by ruthie: Well bdgee, where do YOU get your info from?????
Definately not from Fox News or some pilled up goof ball spreading hate on the radio.
Posts: 11304 | From: Fort Worth, Texas | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't feel any need to restrict my sources to those commonly accepted.
Then, when I find information, I work to find other reliable sources that confirm that the things that are claimed to be facts are.
Posts: 11304 | From: Fort Worth, Texas | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
-------------------- One is never completely useless. One can always serve as a bad example. Posts: 2430 | From: CA | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
