Pelosi Arm-Wrestles Over Cash for the House Gym

By Emily Belz and Alexander Bolton
August 08, 2007

After dueling with House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman John Dingell (D-Mich.) to pass a renewable energy bill, Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) faces a wrestling match with another rogue chairman. And this one can bench-press 265 pounds. Pelosi is set to square off against Rep. Neil Abercrombie (D-Hawaii), the power-lifting chairman of the House gym committee.

Abercrombie is touting his efforts to secure funding in the legislative branch spending bill to begin an estimated $8 million renovation of the House gym. The project is personally important to Abercrombie, who sets a yearly goal to bench-press 200 pounds more than his age, now 69.

Pelosi and other Democratic leaders are not eager for a multimillion-dollar renovation of the congressional members-only gym to be one of the first accomplishments of the Democratic majority. They worry that freshman Democrats could be attacked on the campaign trail next year for approving a fancy new gym for themselves after winning office.

Democratic leaders held a special meeting with Abercrombie earlier this year to tell him that now is not the time for a new House gym and also instructed him not to mention the issue to reporters, according to Democratic sources

But Abercrombie hasn’t stopped talking about it. He insists that the gym needs renovating and is pushing for federal money to finance a redesign.

Abercrombie showed last week that he’s not afraid to confront his leadership. Angered by a last-minute discovery that leaders would not schedule a floor vote on an Iraq bill he sponsored, Abercrombie introduced a motion to adjourn the House in protest, a rare tactic for a member of the majority to wield against his leaders. Abercrombie was the only Democrat to vote for the motion. When it comes to the House members’ gym, Abercrombie also talks tough.

Officially, the facility is called “The Wellness Center.” Abercrombie calls it “The Badness Center.”

It may not be a Turkish prison, but the windowless facility in the bowels of the Rayburn House Office Building is hardly upscale.

The gym’s scent is reminiscent of sweaty basketball pennies and musty basements. A half-court backs up against a little netted area for driving golf balls. Drab 1970s-era office chairs line the gym wall. Behind a saloon-style door off the half-court, the exercise machines are crammed together.

The lack of amenities are all the more galling when compared to the gleaming new gym reserved for House staffers. In the staff members’ gym, each elliptical machine and treadmill has its own flat-screen TV hooked up to cable.

The locker rooms are well lit (not many overhead fluorescents), with vanity tables in the women’s for reapplying mascara or blow-drying hair.

Staffers can attend classes or roll around on Pilates balls in an aerobics room lined with full-length mirrors. The staff gym is designed to allow men and women equal access to all the equipment.

Abercrombie argues the staff gym should be the model for lawmakers’ gym renovations. He says the current setup is a burden for female lawmakers, making it somewhat awkward for Pelosi, the first woman Speaker of the House, to oppose him.

The women (including lawmakers’ wives) have a smaller, separate gym next to their locker rooms in Rayburn.

To get to the main gym from the women’s locker rooms, they must walk across an underground parking lot. If they want to use the cardiovascular equipment, for example, they must walk through the men’s locker rooms.

Some congresswomen are fed up.

Rep. Mary Fallin (R-Okla.) says she doesn’t use the gym because it’s not convenient from her office in the Longworth House Office Building.

Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.), chairwoman of the Legislative Branch Appropriations Subcommittee, said, “I don’t mind working out in front of men, but you have to go through the men’s locker room.”

She is a swimmer, but to get to the pool she says she would have to walk through a parking garage and upstairs from the locker room.

“Logistically, it’s too difficult,” she said. For the time being, however, Wasserman Schultz agrees with Pelosi that there are more important funding priorities than the gym.

Abercrombie is quick to position himself alongside his female colleagues in a potential showdown with Pelosi.

He says the pinched size of the women’s gym impedes female lawmakers from using it. He says they need more room to get dressed after a workout in this age of television-driven politics.

Not all women agree with Abercrombie. The wife of one congressman who uses the women’s gym regularly said the complaints are overblown.

“The facilities are absolutely fine. They’re great,” said the spouse, who spoke anonymously to avoid angering any lawmakers. “You can’t walk across a parking lot? What’s the big deal?

“Taxpayers would be furious if they knew we were spending their money on gym renovations,” she added, echoing the concern of Democratic leaders.

House appropriators have told Abercrombie that funding for plans to redesign the gym can come from a $60 million account in the legislative branch spending bill. To free the money up, though, Abercrombie must secure final approval from the House Building Commission, which Pelosi chairs.

So while Abercrombie is correct that money for building a new gym has passed the House, it still has to get by Pelosi, who doesn’t seem too scared of Abercrombie’s muscle.

Pelosi would prefer to see money spent on security and other issues.

“The emphasis is on security, safety and greening of the Capitol campus,” Pelosi spokesman Nadeam Elshami said.

I can't read this. Oh that's right, you're on my IGNORE list.

It's Republican's fault that bridges are collapsing. We need more taxes.

Saying the government should spend more time and money on maintaining infrastructure isn't the same as saying they need to tax more. Maybe one feels that rich legislators should purchase their own gym memberships as necessary and appropriate and thusly shift $8 million dollars toward more worthy causes.

Or maybe we could save a couple billion a month by not attacking countries that are no threat to us. Shit, I bet we could fund the infrastructure updates, insure the uninsured, AND cut taxes if we pulled out of Iraq.

Shifting priorities...

Or maybe we could save a couple billion a month by not attacking countries that are no threat to us. Shit, I bet we could fund the infrastructure updates, insure the uninsured, AND cut taxes if we pulled out of Iraq.

Shifting priorities...

3 trillion dollar budget. Yeah, let's cut the funding to the 100 billion that goes to Iraq! Not like that's important...

Bush nailed it on the head today.

Why fix old bridges when we can build a bridge to nowhere?

And B, I don't know if you've been listening to the Democrats lately, but all they've talking about in regards to this is raising taxes as a response. Raise income taxes. Raise gas taxes. Have more toll roads. It's really unbelievable.