HODES ETHICS HYPOCRISY WATCH

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Date:               March 28, 2008

Contact:          Fergus Cullen, Chairman, New Hampshire Republican Party

                        603-225-9341 office

HODES ETHICS HYPOCRISY WATCH

As Rep. Paul Hodes (D-NH) Gives Democrats Credit For “Cleaning Up Washington,” He Neglects To Mention One Of His Own Votes Demonstrating That He And His Colleague Rep. Carol Shea-Porter (D-NH) Are Clearly Part Of The Problem

Hodes Claims That Passage Of Legislation Creating An Independent Congressional Ethics Office Represents “Another Step Democrats Have Taken To Clean Up Washington”

“Hodes Spoke In Favor Of Establishing The Panel . . . [Saying] It Represents ‘Another Step That The Democrats Have Taken To Clean Up Washington.’” “Hodes spoke in favor of establishing the panel before Congress took a two-week recess in mid-March. He said it represents ‘another step that the Democrats have taken to clean up Washington.’ The new Office of Congressional Ethics, slated to be functional in July, would include three members appointed by Speaker Nancy Pelosi and three by Minority Leader John Boehner. None may be current House members, federal employees or lobbyists.” (Matt Negrin, “Hodes Helps Give Birth To Independent Ethics Panel,” Union Leader, March 28, 2008)

Yet Hodes And Shea-Porter Both Voted To Protect A Democrat Leader Accused Of Violating House Ethics Rules

In May 2007, Representative Jack Murtha (D-PA) Was Accused Of Violating House Ethics Rules By Threatening To Deny Funding For A Colleague’s Project

Murtha, The Democratic Chairman Of The House Defense Appropriations Subcommittee, Was Accused Of Threatening To Deny Funding For Projects Requested By Republican Representative Mike Rogers (R-MI). “Rep. John P. Murtha (D-Pa.) threatened to deny any further spending projects to a Republican who challenged him over an earmark, his antagonist has charged -- a potential violation of House rules. Rep. Mike Rogers (R-Mich.) had challenged money that Murtha inserted into an intelligence bill last week.” (Patrick O'Connor, “Murtha Accused Of Rules Violation,” Politico, May 18, 2007)

“House Rules State That Lawmakers Cannot Make Spending Projects Conditional On How Another Lawmaker Decides To Vote.” (Jonathan E. Kaplan and Jackie Kucinich, “Dems Save Murtha A Slap,” The Hill, May 23, 2007)

Ø                                   “Lawmakers ‘may not condition the inclusion of language to provide funding for a congressional earmark, a limited tax benefit, or a limited tariff benefit in any’ legislation, according to House rule XXIII, clause 16.” (Patrick O'Connor, “Murtha Accused Of Rules Violation,” Politico, May 18, 2007)

But Hodes And Shea-Porter Both Voted To Kill A Bill That Would Have Reprimanded Murtha For His Actions

Hodes And Shea-Porter Voted With A Majority Of Democrats To Table The House Resolution To Reprimand Murtha. (H. Res. 428: Roll Call #402: Passed 219-189, May 22, 2003, Hodes and Shea-Porter voted Yea)

Passage Of The Resolution Would Have Been A “Slap On The Wrist” To Murtha. “House Democrats spared Rep. John Murtha (D-Pa.) from a parliamentary slap on the wrist by defeating a resolution aimed at reprimanding him for allegedly threatening to revoke another lawmaker’s earmarks.” (Jonathan E. Kaplan and Jackie Kucinich, “Dems Save Murtha A Slap,” The Hill, May 23, 2007)