Heath Shuler: Number 1 on Pelosi’s Bad List?
Associated Press photo
How does Heath Shuler take the top spot away from Rush Limbaugh on a so-called “bad list?“
Politico’s Glenn Thrush has written an article of who he considers to be on the list of individuals who are on the “bad side” of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. You would think conservative radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh would easily be in the number one position on the Democratic representative from California’s list.
But Thrush reserves the top spot for western North Carolina Congressman Heath Shuler - a fellow Democrat to Pelosi - with the following reasons:
No Democrat has done quite so much in so short a time to arouse Pelosi’s disdain as the failed-Redskins-quarterback-turned-ambitious-North-Carolina-congressman.
The conservative, anti-abortion Shuler would have made the list for voting against both bank bailout bills and the stimulus package, but the way he went about it didn’t help; Shuler told an audience back home that “House leadership and Senate leadership have really failed” on the $787 billion package.
The thing that riles Pelosi most, according to several House aides, is that she believes Shuler’s motives are as much political as they are ideological — and that he’s picking a fight with her to position himself for a run against Sen. Richard Burr (R-N.C.) next year.
Unless Shuler is planning a long House career, picking a fight with Pelosi may indeed have its advantages: His 2006 opponent, incumbent GOP Rep. Charles Taylor, scored points by portraying Shuler as a Pelosi acolyte.
“I don’t know if Shuler is talking without thinking or if he’s just making the calculation that distancing himself from Pelosi is never a bad thing to do,” said a senior House leadership aide.
You can read the entire column by clicking here.
Representative Shuler voted against the massive stimulus plan twice and issued this statement following his second NO vote on the legislation that passed and was signed into law:
“We all agree that action must be taken to stimulate our economy. However, I continue to disagree with the course of action laid out in this bill. Its focus should have been solely on programs that offer an immediate economic impact—like extending unemployment insurance—and investments in our nation’s infrastructure, which have a rate of return of 6 to 1. While this final bill does provide some funding in those areas I am remarkably concerned that only 3.4% of the funding in this package goes toward repairing our country’s highways and bridges.
More specifically, across the country there are currently transportation projects totaling $64 billion that could be under contract within 180 days, yet this bill provides only $27.5 billion for those projects.”
In the end, this bill simply contained entirely too much spending in areas that will not provide an immediate stimulative effect to our nation’s economy. With our national debt approaching $11 trillion we should not be borrowing hundreds of billions of dollars without careful and deliberate consideration.
Additionally, I am remarkably disappointed in House leadership for bringing a bill of this size and magnitude up for a vote without giving members adequate time to review it fully. We must have a greater respect for this institution and for its Members.”
Advertisement
Advertisement