At first we thought this had to be a joke, but sadly it it isn't. Government contractors with ties to the defense industry are openly campaigning on the "Skelton will get us more earmarks" ticket. From a letter sent by Worldwide Technology Chairman David Steward:
In his current role as chairman of the (Armed Services) Committee, Ike oversees the administration of defense contracts, which contributed nearly $13 billion to the Missouri economy in 2008 and helped to create 30,000 jobs that year,” Steward wrote in a letter to local business leaders. “The loss of Congressman Skelton as an advocate of Missouri and chairman of the Armed Services Committee would be detrimental to our state’s economy."
The background? From the St. Louis Business Journal:
Government work accounts for about 30 percent of World Wide Technology’s revenue, which reached $2.2 billion last year. Earlier this month, the company was awarded a two-year, $27 million contract from the U.S. Department of Defense for technology and supply chain work at the Tri-Service Medical Education and Training Campus at Fort Sam Houston, Texas.
What's happening is very transparent. After turning on his district and voting with Nancy Pelosi 95% of the time, Skelton is using his leadership position in Pelosi's cabal to get the financial support of government contractors.
Skelton is hoping that their money will help him overcome all other odds, and they're hoping for more earmarks.
It's such a stark contrast against the moderate that Skelton used to be. Ten years ago he never would have sold out to someone like Nancy Pelosi. He would have campaigned on his voting record, not the support of government contractors. He never would have believed that the benefits of House leadership were worth turning your back on your district and voting the wrong way on so many issues.
A while back Jack Miles said that the value of Skelton's earmarks "cannot be overestimated." It actually can be estimated very precisely - to the dollar amount. What can't be overestimated is the problems that an elected official has when he stops representing his district.
Comments