May 19, 2006
Votementum Building -- Committee Passes D.C. Legislation
Are the stars aligning? We're slow to trust Tom Davis after he toyed with our heart last week, saying first that a vote for D.C. was a sure thing, then warning us that the road was still quite long and fraught with danger. One thing's for sure, however. Davis is doing his damnedest to build momentum (Tomentum?) for the bipartisan bill, and he's close to convincing us it's a real possibility.
Yesterday, with District officials and D.C. Vote supporters looking on, Davis' House Government Reform Committee approved the measure to the tune of 29-4, with 14 Republicans joining 15 Democrats in voting yes. The four GOP nays included the vote of Ohioan Rep. Jean Schmidt, who famously called decorated veteran Rep. John Murtha a coward on the floor of the House. And according to the Post story on the vote, former vice presidential candidate Jack Kemp managed to change the mind of one of his compatriots, convincing Rep. Dan Burton that giving the District a vote was a civil rights issue. D.C. Mayor Anthony Williams expressed his happiness with the vote, stating in a press release:
I am extremely pleased by today’s committee vote approving HR 5388. It shows that Democrats and Republicans can come together to agree on at least one thing – that it’s undemocratic for the residents of the District of Columbia not to have a vote in Congress. I hope that the members of the House Judiciary Committee will give this bill the same prompt and favorable consideration.Lots of barriers still stand in the way, of course, the most immediate of which is a hearing in the House Judiciary Committee. The seriousness of the discussion taking place seems to indicate that the prospects for winning voting rights are good this time around, however, and their ultimate achievement inevitable. We're interested in seeing your feelings on the matter, though, so take today's DCist poll: Will D.C. get a House vote this year?
Picture taken by media personality and Fishbowl D.C. editor Patrick Gavin.
|
Was that the same John Murtha who last week called a bunch of Marines serving in Iraq cold blooded murderers? I'm glad he can call other Marines murderers, but God forbid, someone should question his motives as political.
Yes, a bunch of Marines that the military has seen fit to investigate based on evidence they shot a group of unarmed women and children.
That's not really the point, though. Question his motives all you want, but it's inane to call him a coward.
"Yesterday I stood at Arlington National Cemetery attending the funeral of a young Marine in my district. He believed in what we were doing is the right thing and had the courage to lay his life on the line to do it. A few minutes ago I received a call from Colonel Danny Bubp, Ohio Representative from the 88th district in the House of Representatives. He asked me to send Congress a message: Stay the course. He also asked me to send Congressman Murtha a message, that cowards cut and run, Marines never do. Danny and the rest of America and the world want the assurance from this body—that we will see this through."
No where in that quote is Congressman Murtha called a coward. Your inclusion of Jean Schmidt or Congressman Murtha in a DC voting rights story is inane.
Ben - Are you Ben Domenech? I agree that the mention probably wasn't necessary, but to say Schmidt didn't call Murtha a coward is a joke. To say otherwise is the equivalent of saying "That depends on what the meaning of is, is."
I would have to agree that the Jean Schmidt reference was a tad gratutious. I find that DCist is best when it doesn't start talking about national politics. I understand there's some overlap between national and local politics here, but there's no need to try to include more national politics than necessary.
The newsworthy fact was that it passed the committe by a large vote. Who the identity was of the naysayers was not newsworthy other than as an unfair insinuation that anyone against DC representation likes to call war heroes cowards.
You guys are better than that.
But I'm not. Schmidt is a real horror show, and I hear Murtha eats live puppies.
"there's some overlap between national and local politics here"
Just "some"?
Ok. There's "an" overlap of national and local politics on this issue. What's your point? That doesn't change the fact that there's no reason to shoehorn an unrelated national issue into a discussion of a primarily local issue.
Just pointing out the clarification. Although, I don't necessarily see news in the whole "coward" thing, DCist focuses on issues important to D.C. residents. As a D.C. resident, I want to know who voted against D.C. representation and why. Wouldn't you?
ok fair enough, but i kinda doubt that schmidt voted against dc voting rights because he thinks murtha is a coward.
*she