Slog News & Arts

Line Out

Music & Nightlife

« Best. Casting. News. Ever. | Rick Santorum »

Wednesday, November 8, 2006

Rep. Jim McDermott: Maybe He Won’t be Getting that House Ways and Means Committee Chairmanship After All

posted by on November 8 at 12:57 PM

So, while I’m proud to say that I voted for my ex-girlfriend instead of Frank Chopp (Wal-Mart sell out/Viaduct rebuild), I’m even prouder to say that I voted—as I always do—for my friend Ryan instead of U.S. Rep Jim McDermott.

I just think McDermott wastes a safe Democratic seat in the U.S. Congress by not being an effective or influential leader. He’s apparently not very generous with his comrades either.

Check out this Nov. 7 article from DC rag The Hill:

Nearly all House Democrats have channeled at least some of their own campaign funds into this year’s competitive districts by contributing to the party’s effort. They have given $31.5 million to the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC), according to the committee’s internal tally of Oct. 31.

Pelosi and Rep. Charles Rangel (D-N.Y.), who would become Ways and Means Committee chairman, have each donated $800,000. Only three Democrats who occupy safe districts and plan to serve next year failed to contribute to the DCCC: Reps. Jim McDermott (Wash.), Brad Miller (N.C.) and Gene Taylor (Miss.).

RSS icon Comments

1

Hey Josh - a bunch of folks on Kos were keeping a list of well funded folks who hadn't contributed, and we had a lengthy debate about McDermott. The general consensus was that Jim gets a pass as he's fighting off that nasty legal effort trying to bankrupt him for outing Newt on that taped phone call a couple years ago. I won't deny that McDermott could be a stronger force for good, but let's not overlook how the R's punish good people when they try to tell the truth.

Posted by el ganador | November 8, 2006 1:28 PM
2

McDermott is still facing some serious legal problems from the Republican's bullshit case against him, so I think he actually does have a good excuse for holding onto his cash.

Posted by thehim | November 8, 2006 1:28 PM
3

Over the last six years, at least, McDermott has been very generous and given thousands to his colleagues' campaigns. Inslee's a better legislator, no doubt. But you'll miss him when you see all the corporate Dems come out of the woodwork to follow him once he retires. It will make the recent 43rd district state leg race look like nothing. McD's from a different era. Apathetic, resting on his laurels, yes. But more to the left than 9 out of 10 Dem leaders in WA state, who, if we teleported them back to the late 60s and early 70s, would be indistinguishable from pro-war, Dan Evans-style Republicans.

Posted by trevor | November 8, 2006 1:40 PM
4

Comments 1 & 2,
Yes, I get it on the giant legal bills. (Eli actaully did a big story on that for us a few months back.)

I don't see his legal bills as a legit excuse... I actually see them as a part of the problem. I'd rather not have a Congressman who's raising money to pay his legal bills.

Does that mean the R strategy has worked? No. The seat is a safe one. If someone else was there (without the legal fees), we'd still have our seat... plus a Rep. who wasn't bogged down financially.

Posted by Josh Feit | November 8, 2006 2:26 PM
5

Wow, that's pretty cold. So it doesn't matter that those legal fees are from fighting a court battle that is essentially retribution for him outing Gingrich?

I don't understand your problem with McDermott. Seems a bit petty to me.

Posted by flamingbanjo | November 8, 2006 2:40 PM
6

Josh, noone cares. Jim's da man! Seniority is all that matters. heck, the deal with Lieberman is he gets a pass on his betrayal, so ain't noone gonna call out Jim.

Posted by Will in Seattle | November 8, 2006 2:43 PM
7

Flamingbanjo,
I understand that McDermott is fighting the good fight about the public's right to know on the Gingrich tape issue. I support his fight. In addition to Eli's larger story on it, I had Eli do a piece on it for the news section.

However, that's a different issue than settling for a Congressman who can't kick in to help out in less secure races because of that lawsuit.
In other words, 3 cheers to McDermott for fighting this thing. But in the mean time, I'd like to see someone else in the seat.

Posted by Josh Feit | November 8, 2006 3:03 PM
8

I agree with Josh. McDermott is not particularly effective. I wish he would retire and let a serious Seattle progressive take the seat. Licata for Congress?

Posted by lorax | November 8, 2006 3:54 PM
9

I think his comarades know the reason he can't be generous is that he is still paying the price for helping to bring down Newt. Wouldn't they reward that?

Posted by elenchos | November 8, 2006 4:50 PM
10

Josh, what is your measure for "effective"? Bringing home lots of pork, or being one of the few voices in the wilderness of the past 12 years that was actually willing and able to speak truth to power? Jim hasn't been "effective" and "influential" precisely for the reasons that most other Dems in Congress haven't been effective or influential. They were in the minority with a Republican majority for the past 12 years who didn't govern from the center (requiring bi-partisan cooperation) but from the far right, therefore marginalizing anyone who tried to pass legislation or excersize influence that wasn't inline with their agenda.

Jim is also a low-key and humble. He's not a showboater. Even if he had been part of a Dem majority, I suspect that his accomplishments would be underrated.

Finally, Jim has consistently given leftover campaign cash to other Dems in need (either to retire debt, or because they were in a tough race). Because of this previous generosity(instead of raising and hoarding tons of campaign cash), that he's now forced to raise a considerable amount of money to try to retire the legal bills hanging over his head.

While I agree that the 7th District shouldn't be Rep. McDermott's indefinitely, I believe that he does work hard for the district, is a decent man, and when he's elected Chairman of Ways and Means will be an influential and effective member of a Democratic majority.

Posted by Chris | November 8, 2006 6:08 PM
11

for the ill informed - jim m. took all the possible abuse when he so publicly and vehemently opposed the Iraq war --- the seminal issue of the decade.

so josh - are you angry that he doesn't do show and tell at your porn fair? or isn't cast as the miracle worker in the R controlled to the max congress? if there was a way the neo cons could have taken his office key they would have - they hate him

or just that the political savants at the stranger - who liked the war back when - don't think he is way cool

and by the way, the seat when vacated will be a dog pile - and top dog will be eminent homo leader ed murray --- be warned and beware - ed has lusted for that seat for years, no secret

lots of us activist queers no longer live in the 43rd, hence jamie's slim margin - but we all live in the 7th - it will be ed's to take when the time comes

Posted by Jack | November 8, 2006 6:36 PM

Comments Closed

In order to combat spam, we are no longer accepting comments on this post (or any post more than 14 days old).