Democrats move to cut Bush’s war funding…
AlterNet
…if Iraq withdrawal vetoed
By Bob Geiger
Posted on April 2, 2007, Printed on April 2, 2007
http://www.alternet.org/bloggers/geiger/50044/
The White House and Republican leaders may think that they will have dodged the majority of the American people when George W. Bush vetoes the recently-passed war-funding bill containing a provision mandating withdrawal from Iraq but, as they so often are, they will be mistaken.
In anticipation of a Bush veto and the likelihood that they wont be able to summon enough Republicans who care about the troops or public opinion sufficiently to override that veto, Senate Democrats are already rolling out a contingency plan that puts the GOP on notice about something very important: That they are going to be forced over and over again to be on the record as voting to strand our military men and women in the middle of a bloody civil war.
Senator Russ Feingold (D-WI), long one of the gutsy leaders on the Democratic side of the Senate aisle, has announced that he will propose legislation immediately on return from this week’s break that will cut off all funding for the Iraq war in less than a year.
Upping the ante on another major showdown immediately following the expected Bush veto of the war-funding (and withdrawal) bill, is the fact that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) supports the Feingold measure and has signed on as the bill’s first cosponsor.
I am pleased to cosponsor Senator Feingolds important legislation, Reid said. I believe it is consistent with the language included in the supplemental appropriations bill passed by a bipartisan majority of the Senate. If the President vetoes the supplemental appropriations bill and continues to resist changing course in Iraq, I will work to ensure this legislation receives a vote in the Senate in the next work period.
The Feingold legislation would take the withdrawal language passed last week a step further by not just calling for a withdrawal of troops, but actually cutting off money for the war effort, thus forcing Bush’s hand.
With only three narrow exceptions to the directive, the bill states that redeployment of U.S. forces must begin within 120 days of enactment and, more importantly, that “no funds appropriated or otherwise made available under any provision of law may be obligated or expended to continue the deployment in Iraq of members of the United States Armed Forces after March 31, 2008.”
I am delighted to be working with the Majority Leader to bring our involvement in the Iraq war to an end, said Feingold, in a statement. Congress has a responsibility to end a war that is opposed by the American people and is undermining our national security. By ending funding for the Presidents failed Iraq policy, our bill requires the President to safely redeploy our troops from Iraq.
The Senate is in recess this week but it is expected that Senator Feingold will formally propose his legislation on the first day of the next work session, April 10.
“This is the next significant step toward ending this war,” Feingold said in an interview over the weekend. “Congress can’t afford to be characterized as backing down at this point. . . . If he [Bush] vetoes it, he’s basically challenging us to accept his will.”
Bob Geiger is a writer, activist and Democratic operative in Westchester County, NY. You can reach Bob at geiger.bob@gmail.com and read more from him at BobGeiger.com.
© 2007 Independent Media Institute. All rights reserved.
View this story online at: http://www.alternet.org/bloggers/geiger/50044/
Text Of Feingold-Reid Bill
Here’s the full text of the Feingold-Reid bill announced today, that will truly force George W. Bush’s hand by cutting of all funding for the Iraq war in less than a year.
* * * * *
(a) Transition of Mission – The President shall promptly transition the mission of United States forces in Iraq to the limited purposes set forth in subsection (d).
(b) Commencement of Safe, Phased Redeployment from Iraq – The President shall commence the safe, phased redeployment of United States forces from Iraq that are not essential to the purposes set forth in subsection (d). Such redeployment shall begin not later than 120 days after the date of the enactment of this Act.
(c) Prohibition on Use of Funds – No funds appropriated or otherwise made available under any provision of law may be obligated or expended to continue the deployment in Iraq of members of the United States Armed Forces after March 31, 2008.
(d) Exception for Limited Purposes – The prohibition under subsection (c) shall not apply to the obligation or expenditure of funds for the limited purposes as follows:
(1) To conduct targeted operations, limited in duration and scope, against members of al Qaeda and other international terrorist organizations.
(2) To provide security for United States infrastructure and personnel.
(3) To train and equip Iraqi security services.
posted by Bob Geiger at 4/02/2007 10:53:00 AM
Source
It won’t pass. They barely passed the bill last week, and that was a lot less controversial.
Warning Comment
It won’t pass. They barely passed the bill last week, and that was a lot less controversial.
Warning Comment
I think that every poltition should get their troops out of all the countries where there is a war. This isn’t right how so many people are getting killed. I figure they should fight each other and kill their own. Then maybe after they are all dead the children can run the country…I bet they would do a way better job that the jerks who are now.
Warning Comment
I think that every poltition should get their troops out of all the countries where there is a war. This isn’t right how so many people are getting killed. I figure they should fight each other and kill their own. Then maybe after they are all dead the children can run the country…I bet they would do a way better job that the jerks who are now.
Warning Comment
WHY do they HATE America?
Warning Comment
WHY do they HATE America?
Warning Comment
Thanks for your notes…I appreciate them.
Warning Comment
Thanks for your notes…I appreciate them.
Warning Comment