Minority Leader to Resign

[NavyDave]

Talk about being a sore loser :cry:

Wednesday, November 06, 2002

WASHINGTON — Numerous Democratic sources inside and outside of the House said on Wednesday that they expect Minority Leader Richard ( Lil Dick) A. Gephardt to resign as leader of the House Democrats and devote the next few months to deciding whether or not to run for president in 2004.

These sources expect Gephardt to announce his resignation by the end of this week and possibly as early as Thursday.

"What happens very soon is Dick decides not to run for leader," said one Democratic source close to Gephardt and the Democratic leadership. "He lets the Democratic caucus move on and takes time to weigh his options."

Gephardt aides declined to comment on his future Wednesday.

Three Democratic sources on Capitol Hill told Fox News that they expect Gephardt to step down.

Two Democratic representatives -- Harold Ford of Tennessee and Peter Deutsch of Florida -- have already publicly suggested that Gephardt must resign his leadership.

"I have tremendous respect for him and the energy and passion he brings to the issues -- there's not a more passionate Democrat in the House," Ford told Fox News. But, "if he can't win ball games, then the organization has to move him on."

Ford said there's a lot of uneasiness among Democrats because they are reluctant to oust Gephardt, but noted that if the House were a multi-million dollar corporation and its president were failing the company, "shareholders would have asked for his resignation."

"We have to start planning for our future," added one key Democratic House aide. "For six months, we've had a leader with a conflict of interest. Gephardt has been deciding things based on two factors: the Democrats in the House and his possible presidential bid. We need to move on."

Gephardt has frequently been mentioned as a possible presidential candidate in 2004. Last week, he said that if Democrats won the House, he would accept the speakership, putting him in a strong position from which to launch a presidential bid.

However, entering a fifth session as minority leader is not as strong a position from which to begin a presidential campaign.

Gephardt refused to comment last week about remaining the Democratic leader.

The two Democratic members who would vie to replace Gephardt as leader are Reps. Nancy Pelosi of California and Martin Frost of Texas. Both have been making calls to other Democrats in preparation for a race for leader.

The pace of the activity, several Democrats told Fox News, picked up Wednesday in the aftermath of Democratic loses in the House.

"There is a considerable amount of disaffection," said another top Democratic House aide.

Pelosi, according to several sources, already has the votes to defeat Frost. Rep. Steny Hoyer of Maryland, these sources also said, has the votes to become House minority whip, the No. 2 leadership post.

Earlier this year, Pelosi beat Hoyer for the whip post, up for grabs after Rep. David Bonior of Michigan resigned the post to run for governor of his state, a bid which he lost in the primary to now-governor elect Jennifer Granholm.

Fox News' Major Garrett contributed to this report.

[Yomar]

So who is it going to be?

http://www.house.gov/pelosi/

http://www.house.gov/frost/

[Kilmer17]

I hope it's Pelosi. It will give us a good spirited issues debate. It will also allow the GOP to form a consensus with more moderate Dems.

No doubt about it, the vote for party leader will be a sure sign as to the direction the Dem party is headed.

[Yomar]

I agree, the more I think about it, the more obvious the decision seems. She would spice things up a bit, and she would certainly get more exposure than Frost would.

[redman]

Originally posted by NavyDave

Numerous Democratic sources inside and outside of the House said on Wednesday that they expect Minority Leader Richard ( Lil Dick) A. Gephardt to resign as leader of the House Democrats and devote the next few months to deciding whether or not to run for president in 2004.

I see. So he's trying to parlay the momentum from yesterday's election into a Presidential run. :laugh:

[fansince62]

this ought to be interesting....Pelosi is very capable....she's also divisive and associated with the more left leaning elements of the dem party. this will clarify things greatly!!!! the only leader the dems really have (Clinton) is an ethics nightmare....what a dilemma!!!

[NavyDave]

The last thing I want to hear about is her being exposed:rolleyes:

Yeah a liberal from Frisco being the face of the Democrats :laugh:

Gotta love it

[Nighthawk]

It'll be Pelosi by a landslide. It won't even be close. Frost won't stand a chance.

By the way, did anybody see her daughter, Alexandra's documentary, Journey's with George on HBO Tuesday night.

If anything it made the media look bad.

[Riggo-toni]

Pulling out a leader from the far left would be the greatest gift the Dems could give the GOP since Jesse Jackson's presidential runs. The GOP replaced Newt w/ a useless, faceless hastert to deny the Dems a lightning rod for criticism. Now the Dems want to put in an outspoken hard left-winger in the hot seat. Do it, and they'll lose even more seats.

It saddens/baffles me how the parties keep putting in either idiots like Mitchell or Gephardt, or uninspiring hacks like Dole, Daschle or Hastert; while completely passing over competent, articulate, and effective legislators like Bob Kerry, Joe Lieberman, Sam Nunn, John Kasich, Tim Penny, Warren Rudman, etc.

[fansince62]

riggo...i don't agree on the list of names...but do agree on the uninspiring nature of leadership in the wings of both parties. we agree on something!!!! one of us ought to be very afraid!!!!

[Sarge]

Excellent. Hopefully she'll advocate electric cars for everybody, gay marriges, no more house building because all trees will be off limits to logging and a complete elimination of the Armed forces. 2004 will be a walk in the park.

[@DCGoldPants]

I think it doesn't matter who they name right now and that's the point for them.

Its all on the other party right now. If they can't produce big once they have even more power, they are going to lose huge and its going to be a huge embarrasement. Right now the folks in charge should be focused on how to fix all these problems instead of poking fun at the other guys.

I hope we get electic cars. These fullcell companies are going to be huge in a few years.

[Yomar]

National Review's take on it:

http://www.nationalreview.com/miller/miller110802.asp

The Party of Pelosi

Why Nancy P. is good for the GOP.

onservatives hope to win another key election next week — when House Democrats meet on Thursday to pick a replacement for retiring minority leader Dick Gephardt.

That's because Nancy Pelosi of California is putting her name forward as Gephardt's successor. She's currently the Democratic whip, which is her party's second-ranking post in the House. She's also an anti-New Democrat leftist who is about as deeply out of touch with ordinary Americans as any member of her party. Best of all, it looks like she's going to win.

But first, a word about Dick Gephardt: He will not realize his dream of becoming Speaker of the House, but he was a strong party leader who understood the mechanics of running a congressional caucus. He's also no cultural liberal. The son of a milk-truck driver, he started his career in Congress a quarter-century ago as a pro-life Democrat from St. Louis, right in the heart of the country. Personal political ambitions compelled him to trample many of his early principles, but he was always more of a blue-collar guy than a man of the far Left. He eventually came to sit at the center of this party — more liberal than the moderates but to the right of the extremists. He may now run for president, and nobody who remembers his 1988 caucus victory in Iowa will want to count him out.

One thing's for sure: Nancy Pelosi could never win an Iowa caucus. She is what Jeane Kirkpatrick once called a "San Francisco Democrat" — and in her case the term applies both literally and figuratively. Her 8th congressional district in San Francisco is one of the most liberal in the land; two years ago, Al Gore carried it by 61 points. George W. Bush finished a mere seven points ahead of Ralph Nader.

Pelosi says the Democrats must now define themselves more clearly in opposition to the Bush administration and congressional Republicans. "We must draw clear distinctions between our vision of the future and the extreme policies put forward by the Republicans. We cannot allow Republicans to pretend they share our values and then legislate against those values without consequence," said Pelosi in a statement released yesterday.

One clear distinction, of course, involves Iraq. Pelosi voted against the recent war resolution. She also came out against the Gulf War a decade ago. Neither of these is an especially remarkable position for a liberal Democrat to take. Pelosi, however, made the latter one remarkable when she based her opposition to the war on the environment: "While we are gravely concerned about the loss of life from combat in the Persian Gulf War, environmental consequences of the war are as important to the people there as the air they breathe and the water they drink."

Isn't this exactly the kind of person conservatives would like to see the Democrats put forward as their leading spokesman (oops! spokeswoman) in the House?

Pelosi is the embodiment of what Kirkpatrick chastised at the 1984 Republican convention, which was held just a few weeks after the Democrats met in San Francisco. "When the San Francisco Democrats treat foreign affairs as an afterthought, as they did, they behaved less like a dove or a hawk than like an ostrich — convinced it would shut out the world by hiding its head in the sand," said the U.N. ambassador. "When the Soviet Union walked out of arms-control negotiations, and refused even to discuss the issues, the San Francisco Democrats didn't blame Soviet intransigence. They blamed the United States. But then, they always blame America first."

That speech is now 16 years old, but it's still a perfect description of Nancy Pelosi.

Minority leader Pelosi will move her party to the left. In the wake of Tuesday's defeats, the Left will demand it — but she'll want to take it there on her own accord. By making her party more liberal, however, she risks making it even more of a minority, and soon. If Pelosi rises to the House Democrats' top job, look for moderates to defect to the GOP. Potential switchers include Ken Lucas of Kentucky, Colin Peterson of Minnesota, and Charlie Stenholm of Texas.

One of Gephardt's talents was keeping his party united — arguably a tougher chore than House Speaker Denny Hastert faces with his GOP colleagues. Pelosi, however, has demonstrated a penchant for petty squabbling. Earlier this year, her PAC donated $10,000 to Rep. Lynn Rivers of Michigan, who was forced by redistricting into a tough primary against fellow Democrat John Dingell. Leadership figures traditionally don't take sides during these match-ups, but Pelosi nonetheless saw fit to boost a fellow feminist (who lost). Pelosi may have sincerely (but wrongly) felt that Rivers was more essential to House Democrats. Her electioneering, however, came with a price tag: Dingell cut back his fundraising activities for colleagues.

Pelosi appears to face only a single competitor for the minority leader post: Martin Frost of Texas, a man more in the mold of Gephardt. Yet there is already talk that Pelosi has compiled an extensive list of Democrats who support her bid. It hasn't been released, but Roll Call reported that it may contain as many as 110 names — more than enough to secure her election.

The downside for Republicans is that the Pelosi Democrats will become more difficult to work with. Gephardt, by contrast, would engage in occasional bipartisanship: There was always the chance that he would lead a fair number of his colleagues in a sensible direction, as he has done this fall on Iraq. These moments will become even more rare.

But bipartisanship will matter less if there are more Republicans in the House — something that Pelosi, in both the near term and the long run, probably guarantees.