Republican lawmakers say that ties between Rep. John Murtha (D-Pa.) and his brother's lobbying firm, KSA Consulting, may warrant investigation by the House ethics committee... The calls come as Murtha, a former Marine and pro-military Democrat, has made headlines this week by coming out in support of a rapid withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq...KSA directly lobbied Murtha's office on behalf of seven companies, and a Murtha aide told a defense contractor that it should retain KSA to represent it, according to the LA Times.

In early 2004, Murtha reportedly leaned on U.S. Navy officials to sign a contract to transfer the Hunters Point Shipyard to the city of San Francisco , according to the San Francisco Chronicle. A company called Lennar Inc. had right to the land, and Laurence Pelosi, nephew to House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), was an executive with the firm at that time.

Boehner 168, Pence 27, Barton 1. No totals yet on Blunt win.

What's this mean? Members want experience and Shadegg didn't work it hard enough. Resist the easy instinct to think it "sends a message" or is insufficiently reform-oriented. The problem is that Blunt is viewed as having screwed up the Vietnam free trade vote but Shadegg is viewed as having zero whipping skills – hence, his promise to keep Blunt’s deputy Eric Cantor (R-VA) if he beat Blunt.

The Whip has been involved in legislatures since early in their history. The term comes from England, borrowed from the "Whipper-in," a special rider who kept the dogs in line by riding behind. Policy is determined by those who win, not by those whose policy pronouncements are said to be "better."

As Winston Churchill said, Democracy is the worse form of government, except for all the others.

Update... My friend responds,

OK, here’s my rejoinder. Pence got only 27 out of 196 votes. This morning, he proved he can’t lead a team which decides everything by casting ballots! Leaders have followers after all.

Update 2... David Hogberg intends to remind Boehner of this 2003 statement:

Even though we share many ideological similarities, Republicans are not libertarians. Libertarians are generally more hostile to government involvement of any kind on any level; Republicans share this antipathy to the extent that wherever and whenever possible, power (wrongly usurped in the first place by Democratic leaders) should be devolved from the federal government to the hands of states and localities.

But Republicans also are far from being purely conservative. A conservative would like to see the government shrink; a Republican does too, but -- in acknowledging political realities (a new defensive posture after September 11th for one) and the multitude of stakeholders in government after years of liberal control -- has often had to settle for simply slowing its rate of growth. Republicans have accepted such realities as the burdens of majority governance.

In high school my history teacher -- an avowed Marxist -- was proud that his Ph.D. thesis had been a refutation of Friedman's classic Capitalism and Freedom. He thought it was terribly clever that his thesis had been titled "Capitalism aux Friedman." Somehow in my drug-addled youth I got from that the idea that Friedman's middle initial was "O", so when as a young man first discovering Friedman's work I wrote a letter to him, asking him if he would meet with me, I addressed it to "Milton O. Friedman." He replied with a handwritten note scrawled on my letter itself, saying he didn't have time to meet -- with the middle initial "O" crossed out with a pencil-stroke indicating rather extreme annoyance. In more recent years I ended up meeting him several times at Cato events. I got his name right -- but I was as giddy about meeting him as I would have been decades earlier. Perhaps the best compliment I can pay to him is to report that he didn't disappoint me -- his intellect and sparkling wit lived up to my highest expectations (and believe me, they were high).

So many obits and personal reflections have started pouring forth from all over the world, it's hard to begin to catalog them all here. Ben Bernanke's seems to say it all:

"Among economic scholars, Milton Friedman had no peer. The direct and indirect influences of his thinking on contemporary monetary economics would be difficult to overstate. Just as important, in his humane and engaging way, Milton conveyed to millions an understanding of the economic benefits of free, competitive markets, as well as the close connection that economic freedoms bear to other types of liberty. He will be sorely missed."

One aspect of the election that the media have largely ignored thus far is the fact that Republicans who were prominently associated with Social Security privatization took a beating on Tuesday. At the top of this list is Rick Santorum, who actively embraced President Bush's proposals. Last year, Santorum held town meetings around Pennsylvania touting the benefits of Social Security privatization. Last night, the people of Pennsylvania voted to send him out of town by a double-digit margin.

Clay Shaw, one of the leading proponents of Social Security privatization in the House, was also sent packing by his Florida constituents. Chris Chocola, an Indiana congressman who briefly flirted with Social Security privatization, was also soundly defeated in what had previously been a safe district.

After Tuesday's vote, the only politicians who are likely to be pushing Social Security privatization are those looking for a change of career.

* 23 of 24 sponsors of comprehensive reform bills that would allow workers to invest Soc Sec payroll taxes in personal accounts were re-elected. Only Cong. Northup lost.

* 50 of 54 sponsors of reform bills of one kind or another were re-elected.

* The other three defeats, other than Northup, were by members who sponsored investing general revenues (not worker payroll taxes) in personal accounts (Shaw, Chocola), or who embraced only a demonstration of personal accounts in the absence of reform (Santorum.)

"Woods’s Steak Snapped"

That was the headline of a sports briefing in my copy of yesterday’s N.Y. Times. The article was about how Tiger Woods finally lost a match. It further stated that Woods’s veal chop was slightly bruised, but his chicken piccata emerged unscathed.

There’s only so much that spell-check can do.

"No longer is it good enough to say that the president's plans for Social Security are a radical departure from the 1935 vision of Franklin D. Roosevelt. Now the Democrats have to say what they would do to keep the system secure, or whether they would change public expectations of how much help Social Security will provide Americans when they retire.

These two choices -- win or leave, strengthen Social Security or cut public expectations and public disbursements -- may seem stark. But those are the choices. Neither problem, both signature challenges of our era, is ripe for fuzzy responses or fuzzy math. Choose one, make the argument, take a vote, live with the consequences.

...One thing no one, including the ascendant Democrats, says about President Bush is that he is unwilling to make a choice and live with it. A short time after Sept. 11, 2001, Thomas D. Rath, the New Hampshire political strategist, encountered the president at a White House event. Mr. Rath is a congenial man, his impulse unfailingly to offer comfort. To Mr. Bush, like the rest of the country still dealing with the immediate shock of the terrorist attacks on Washington and New York, he said something along these lines: Nobody asks to deal with something like this. Mr. Bush responded immediately and forcefully: Some people do.

Special effects explosions, idling vehicles, teams of workers building monumental sets — all of it contributes to Hollywood‘s newly discovered role as an air polluter, a university study has found.

Although Hollywood seems environmentally conscious thanks to celebrities who lend their names to various causes, the industry created more pollution than individually produced by aerospace manufacturing, apparel, hotels and semiconductor manufacturing, the study found.

Thanks to Dave Nadig for the link.

Posted by Donald L. Luskin at 8:31 AM | link  

Posted by Donald L. Luskin at 4:14 AM | link  

Tuesday, November 14, 2006

Posted by Donald L. Luskin at 11:16 AM | link  

Posted by Donald L. Luskin at 8:44 AM | link  

Monday, November 13, 2006