Trashing Patrick Leahy

The Republican National Committee claims the Vermont Democrat "disrespects" the heroes of Sept. 11, but the charge shows the GOP disrespects the truth.

Topics: Patrick J. Leahy, D-Vt.,

A Republican National Committee e-mail to party activists this week compares the war on terrorism to the GOP’s political fight with Democratic senators, and falsely accuses Senator Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., of “attacking the courage and memory” of the firefighters and policemen who died on Sept. 11.

The e-mail was sent Thursday night to registered members of the RNC’s Team Leader program by Blaise Hazelwood, the political director of the Republican National Committee.

In a letter to the activists contained in the e-mail, Hazelwood draws an outrageous parallel between America’s war on terror and the Republican fight against Democratic opposition in domestic politics:

“Fellow Americans, we are fighting two wars right now. Abroad we fight terrorism and at home we fight the disgraceful and obstructionist Democrat senators.”

After attacking Daschle for blocking a vote on making President Bush’s tax cut permanent, Hazelwood lays into Leahy for “attacking the courage and memory of our fallen heroes from the attack on 9/11.” In another section of the e-mail, an “Action Alert” titled “Senator Leahy Disrespects NY’s Heroes,” Hazelwood tells team leaders to “[e]xpress [their] outrage over Senator Patrick Leahy’s (D-VT) refusal to bring a bill to a vote that would have awarded the Presidential Medal of Valor to firefighters and policemen who responded to the 9/11 attack last year.”

Nowhere in the e-mail is it mentioned that Leahy pushed the resolution in question through the Senate Judiciary Committee, which he chairs, on Thursday, or that Thursday night Democrats passed it unanimously on the Senate floor, along with two similar bills.

Here’s what happened: On Oct. 30, the House passed a resolution calling on President Bush to award the Public Safety Officer Medal of Valor to the police, fire and rescue workers who died on Sept. 11. It was referred to Leahy’s committee and was still awaiting action (along with the two other bills, which originated in the Senate) last Friday, April 12, when the New York Post broadsided Leahy with a scathing article claiming he “single-handedly killed” the House legislation.



Leahy’s spokesman called the report inaccurate, and the senator announced later that day that all three bills would be brought before the committee on Thursday, April 18.

The explanation for the delay, according to Leahy and his staff, is that the senator wanted to wait for the medal review board of public safety officers to be formed, as originally intended under the legislation. The reported goal was for the officers themselves to make recommendations for recipients, rather than having politicians make the choice. Also, the committee had to reconcile the three bills in question. After the controversy arose, Leahy decided instead to support moving all three bills forward.

It’s certainly fair to criticize Leahy for letting procedural issues hold up the bill and then reversing himself under pressure, although Leahy’s explanation seems reasonable. But the GOP e-mail completely fails to acknowledge Leahy’s actions since the Post story came out. And clearly, Leahy never attacked “the courage and memory” of the officers who died on Sept. 11, as Hazelwood falsely claims. Republican spokesman Jim Dyke told me Friday afternoon that when the e-mail went out Thursday afternoon or evening, they “were not aware” that the bill had passed out of committee. When we spoke, he also did not know that the bills had been approved by the Senate as well. It’s not clear what’s worse, the GOP’s vicious rhetoric, or the sloppiness with which it’s bandied about.

Brendan Nyhan is a political scientist currently serving as a RWJ Scholar in Health Policy Research at the University of Michigan.

More Related Stories

Featured Slide Shows

  • Share on Twitter
  • Share on Facebook
  • 1 of 10
  • Close
  • Fullscreen
  • Thumbnails

    Romance novels need a canon

    "Bet Me" by Jennifer Crusie

    A contemporary romantic comedy set to Elvis Costello and lots of luxurious and sinful sugary treats.   Read the whole essay.

    Romance novels need a canon

    "Welcome to Temptation" by Jennifer Crusie

    Another of Crusie's romantic comedies, this one in the shadow of an ostentatiously phallic water tower.   Read the whole essay.

    Romance novels need a canon

    "A Gentleman Undone" by Cecilia Grant

    A Regency romance with beautifully broken people and some seriously steamy sex.   Read the whole essay.

    Romance novels need a canon

    "Black Silk" by Judith Ivory

    A beautifully written, exquisitely slow-building Regency; the plot is centered on a box with some very curious images, as Edward Gorey might say.   Read the whole essay.

    Romance novels need a canon

    "For My Lady's Heart" by Laura Kinsale

    A medieval romance, the period piece functions much like a dystopia, with the courageous lady and noble knight struggling to find happiness despite the authoritarian society.   Read the whole essay.

    Romance novels need a canon

    "Sweet Disorder" by Rose Lerner

    A Regency that uses the limitations on women of the time to good effect; the main character is poor and needs to sell her vote ... or rather her husband's vote. But to sell it, she needs to get a husband first ...   Read the whole essay.

    Romance novels need a canon

    "Frenemy of the People" by Nora Olsen

    Clarissa is sitting at an awards banquet when she suddenly realizes she likes pictures of Kimye for both Kim and Kanye and she is totally bi. So she texts to all her friends, "I am totally bi!" Drama and romance ensue ... but not quite with who she expects. I got an advanced copy of this YA lesbian romance, and I’d urge folks to reserve a copy; it’s a delight.   Read the whole essay.

    Romance novels need a canon

    "The Slightest Provocation" by Pam Rosenthal

    A separated couple works to reconcile against a background of political intrigue; sort of "His Gal Friday" as a spy novel set in the Regency.   Read the whole essay.

    Romance novels need a canon

    "Again" by Kathleen Gilles Seidel

    Set among workers on a period soap opera, it manages to be contemporary and historical both at the same time.   Read the whole essay.

  • Recent Slide Shows

Comments

0 Comments

Comment Preview

Your name will appear as username ( settings | log out )

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href=""> <b> <em> <strong> <i> <blockquote>