The Case Against Murtha: Earmarks and the 2006 Majority Leader Race
Rep. John P. “Jack” Murtha (D-Pa.) lost the race for House majority leader. On November 16, 2006, House Democrats chose Rep. Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) over him by 149 to 86 in a secret ballot, even though Speaker-elect Nancy Pelosi had backed Murtha. Murtha went on to chair the House Appropriations defense subcommittee and died on February 8, 2010. Congress banned earmarks from 2011. They returned in fiscal 2022 as Community Project Funding in the House and Congressionally Directed Spending in the Senate, with public disclosure, a no-financial-interest certification and a cap of 1% of discretionary spending. In November 2026, fiscal 2027 earmarks are still waiting on unfinished spending bills, because the government is running on a stopgap that lasts through December 11, 2026.
The original post (2006)
The post below ran during the 2006 midterm season. It first appeared on the blog Nashville for the 21st Century and was cross-posted on PorkBusters, a campaign run by bloggers against congressional earmarks from 2006 to 2010. The wording has been edited for clarity. The positions belong to the original blogger.
Murtha’s two reputations
Antiwar Democrats had rallied around Murtha after he called in November 2005 for US troops to be withdrawn from Iraq. The blogger argued that Murtha had another side that was less visible outside Washington. To make the point, the post quoted a New York Times report by David D. Kirkpatrick, published in early October 2006:
Outside Washington, Mr. Murtha, a Vietnam veteran and longtime hawk, may be best known for his break with the president over the Iraq war last fall. But inside the Capitol, he is best known for turning earmarks into power. As the top Democrat on the House military spending subcommittee, he often delivers Democratic votes to Republican leaders in a tacit exchange for earmarks for himself and his allies.
In the last year, Democratic and Republican floor watchers say, Mr. Murtha has helped Republicans round up enough Democratic votes to narrowly block a host of Democratic proposals: to investigate federal contracting fraud in Iraq, to reform lobbying laws, to increase financing for flood control, to add $150 million for veterans’ health care and job training, and to exempt middle-class families from the alternative minimum tax.
According to the same Times report, Murtha defended the practice and said deal-making “is what Congress is all about.”
The blogger’s argument
The blogger granted that some readers would call this “the way Washington works.” The objection was about timing. Murtha was running for House majority leader if Democrats won the chamber, and they did win it on November 7, 2006.
The post made three points:
- Most of the House’s work in the new Congress would have nothing to do with Iraq, so Murtha’s role in the war debate was not a good reason to make him majority leader.
- The next few years were a chance to get the budget process under control.
- The evidence that Murtha had traded votes for earmarks should count against him. The blogger wanted a majority leader who would pass earmark reforms to make the budget process “open and ethical.”
The blogger said Murtha could have been that person but was doubtful he would be. The post credited The Plank, a blog at The New Republic, for pointing to the Times story.
What happened next
The vote went against Murtha, and earmark reform went ahead without him. In the years that followed, Congress first required earmarks to be disclosed, then banned them, then brought them back under new rules.
The leadership vote and Murtha’s later career
Hoyer won the majority leader race 149 to 86 on November 16, 2006. Because Pelosi had openly supported Murtha, NPR and other outlets called the result her first defeat as Speaker-elect. In 2007 Murtha became chairman of the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Defense and remained one of the House’s biggest earmarkers.
In November 2008 the FBI raided the PMA Group, a defense lobbying firm. PMA’s founder, Paul Magliocchetti, was close to Murtha, and the firm’s clients had won many earmarks through his subcommittee. The Office of Congressional Ethics recommended no action against Murtha. In February 2010 the House Ethics Committee cleared him and six other lawmakers in the PMA matter. Murtha died on February 8, 2010, at age 77, from complications after gallbladder surgery. Magliocchetti was later sentenced to 27 months in prison for an illegal campaign-contribution scheme. Murtha himself was never charged.
From the ban to the 2021 return
Earmark rules changed in three stages after 2006:
| Period | What changed | Who drove it |
|---|---|---|
| 2007 | House and Senate rules started requiring earmarks to be disclosed with the sponsor’s name | Democratic majorities in the 110th Congress, including the Honest Leadership and Open Government Act of 2007 |
| 2011 to 2021 | Earmarks were banned | House Republican conference rule after the 2010 election; Senate moratorium from early 2011 |
| Fiscal 2022 onward | Earmarks returned as Community Project Funding (House) and Congressionally Directed Spending (Senate) | House and Senate Appropriations Committees under Democratic leadership, kept by later Republican majorities |
How earmarks work in November 2026
Each member who wants an earmark asks the House or Senate Appropriations Committee for it. The request has to be posted publicly. The member has to certify that neither they nor their immediate family has a financial interest in the project. House rules bar earmarks for for-profit companies. Total earmarks are capped at 1% of discretionary spending. The Government Accountability Office audits a sample of funded projects. Since fiscal 2024, the House has accepted requests for only some of the 12 annual spending bills.
Estimates of the fiscal 2026 total depend on what gets counted. Citizens Against Government Waste counted 8,392 earmarks worth $23.7 billion in its 2026 Congressional Pig Book. That count includes items the official disclosure tables do not. The Washington Post put earmarks in the 2026 funding package at nearly $15.5 billion.
Fiscal 2027 began on October 1, 2026, under a continuing resolution. The Continuing Appropriations and Extensions Act, 2027 (H.R. 6500, P.L. 119-103) passed the Senate 90 to 6 and the House 370 to 48, and was signed on September 2, 2026. It funds the government through December 11, 2026. A stopgap continues existing funding but does not pay for new earmarks, so fiscal 2027 projects depend on Congress passing the regular bills.
FAQ
Did John Murtha become House majority leader?
No. On November 16, 2006, House Democrats elected Steny Hoyer majority leader by 149 to 86, even though Speaker-elect Nancy Pelosi had backed Murtha. Hoyer served as majority leader from 2007 to 2011 and again from 2019 to 2023.
Was Murtha ever charged over earmarks?
No. The FBI investigated the PMA Group, a lobbying firm close to Murtha, and the inquiry was still open when he died in February 2010. The House Ethics Committee cleared him in the PMA matter that same month. PMA’s founder, Paul Magliocchetti, was the one convicted, for illegal campaign contributions.
What was PorkBusters?
PorkBusters was a campaign run by bloggers from 2006 to 2010. It published and cross-posted criticism of congressional earmarks, such as this post about Murtha, and encouraged readers to press lawmakers on spending. The campaign has ended. The address now belongs to an unrelated, nonpartisan explainer of federal spending.
Are earmarks banned today?
No. They were banned from 2011 until fiscal 2022, when they came back as Community Project Funding in the House and Congressionally Directed Spending in the Senate. Today they must be disclosed publicly, members must certify they have no financial interest, and the total is capped at 1% of discretionary spending.
How much is spent on earmarks now?
It depends on who is counting. Citizens Against Government Waste put fiscal 2026 at $23.7 billion across 8,392 earmarks. The Washington Post’s count of the 2026 funding package came to nearly $15.5 billion. Either way, earmarks are a small share of total federal spending.
What is the alternative minimum tax mentioned in the 2006 quote?
The alternative minimum tax is a parallel income tax calculation. Because it was not indexed to inflation, it was reaching more and more middle-class households by the mid-2000s. Democrats offered proposals to exempt those families, which is the vote the Times report referred to. Congress later indexed the tax to inflation permanently in the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012.
Sources
- Congress.gov: H.R. 6500, Continuing Appropriations and Extensions Act, 2027
- Congressional Research Service: Overview of Continuing Appropriations for FY2027 (Division A of P.L. 119-103), R49353
- Congressional Research Service: Appropriations Status Table, FY2027
- Office of Rep. Steny Hoyer: Democrats pick Hoyer majority leader (November 2006)
- NPR: Elected House Speaker, Pelosi suffers first defeat (November 16, 2006)
- Roll Call: Ethics report says campaign money didn’t buy Murtha earmarks (February 2010)
- Roll Call: FBI saw dark side of Rep. John Murtha (October 2011)
- MPR News/Associated Press: Pa. Rep. John Murtha, Iraq war critic, dies at 77 (February 2010)
- Citizens Against Government Waste: 2026 Congressional Pig Book release
- The Washington Post: Congressional earmarks are back, to the tune of $15.5 billion (February 2026)
Featured image: John Murtha. Photo: Congressional photographer / Wikimedia Commons, Public domain (file page)
About this article
- Fact-checked before publication.
- Published · Updated
