Support For Anti-Escalation Resolution Gaining Momentum In Senate
The bi-partisan anti-escalation resolution being championed by GOP Senator John Warner appeared to gain momentum today, as two Senators who'd earlier backed a tougher measure announced that they'd support Warner's resolution.
The New York Times has just reported that Dem Senator Joe Biden and GOP Senator Chuck Hagel have agreed to back Warner's measure; Dem Senator Carl Levin agreed to back it last night. It's also backed by GOP Senator Susan Collins and Dem Ben Nelson.
The Democratic leadership of the Senate, which is hoping to push through a condemnation of the escalation with broad bipartisan support, has decided to use the Warner proposal as a "the basis for the debate that will unfold next week, though Republicans could still raise procedural obstacles," the paper reports.
Nonetheless, the measure has drawn opposition from one Dem Presidential candidate, Senator Chris Dodd, who denounced the resolution because it "does not explicitly oppose the escalation, it doesn’t contemplate the phased redeployment from Iraq and all but gives the ‘power of the purse’ to the executive branch."
We have a copy of the resolution for you in our TPM Document Collection.
Update: Two key Senators have just taken a position on the resolution. A spokesperson for Jim Webb tells TPM's Paul Kiel that he's "inclined to support it."
And Russ Feingold says no dice.
It's all a diversion.
It is Congress that can declare war, Congress can undeclare it.
The President is only Commander and Chief as long as Congress keeps the war going.
If Congress declares war, the President can't say no I don't agree, Vice a versa if Congress declares the war over, the President can't say I disagree, were going to keep fighting. If a President has to go before the Congress, and only Congress can declare War, What's the problem if the people tell the Congress to end the war? Is this idiotic or what?
Congress has the war power.
It's We the People, who through our Representatives, control our destiny, in War and Peace.
Is it in the Nations interests or the Neo Cons interests?
February 2, 2007 1:04 AM | Reply | Permalink
Someone please remind me; I know that November was a few months ago and all, but didn't the public overwhelmingly reject this war and how it is being handled? This "resolution" is just a nice way of disagreeing with the president while doing fuck all about what the public demanded happen. Biden and Hagel should be ashamed of themselves; all they care about is '08.
February 2, 2007 8:54 AM | Reply | Permalink
I imagine the dour predictions in the NIE are gonna
make this mushy resolution less viable. I hope Obama, Feingold and Kennedy also get together behind one of their stronger proposals. Time to bring phone, email and letter pressure on Durbin and Reid and the rest to get the strongest bill passed. The Warner bill sets benchmarks but the benchmarks the Bush Adminitraion set out last fall for Maliki should have been implemented by now. He hasn't even tried.
February 2, 2007 9:33 AM | Reply | Permalink
I think they should vote for every single resolution to change course. Bring them all to the Senate floor. Let Susan Collins defend her votes in 2008. Let Norm Coleman defend his votes in 2008. Let them all face the voters. ("While the Democrats were trying to change course in Iraq, Susan Collins voted for more of the same. She refused to support a bill to get our troops out of harm's way.")
These cowards should be revealed to the American people.
In the meantime, the funding authorization bills are where the real action is going to be, and they are coming very, very soon. That's what we need to keep our side focused on, and when/how/where we need to pressure them to act.
February 2, 2007 1:30 PM | Reply | Permalink