McGovern’s Iraq Pullout Bill Not Likely to Surface in House Debate
MCGOVERN
Worcester Telegram & Gazette
Priyanka Dayal
Boston University Washington News Service
Feb. 9, 2007
WASHINGTON, Feb. 9 – With the Democrats now in control of Congress, U.S. Rep. James P. McGovern, D-Worcester, is hoping for a more “open and honest” discussion about the war in Iraq, and he wants his new proposal to cut funding for the war to be part of the discussion. But the U.S. House leadership has decided to limit debate on the Iraq war next week to a non-binding resolution that they say will express support for the troops while rejecting President Bush’s plan to send 21,500 more troops to Iraq.
Public frustration with the war in Iraq helped propel Democrats to a majority in the House last November, and while they are critical of President Bush’s strategy in Iraq, they can’t seem to agree on how critical they should be.
“People have all kinds of plans,” Mr. McGovern said in a telephone interview. “Mine is the toughest that says the war has to come to an end now.”
Several other bills reprimanding the Bush administration’s strategy in Iraq and calling for a redeployment of troops are floating around the House and Senate, as Democrats now in control in Congress mull how to challenge the president’s approach. But the House Democratic leadership, headed by Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md., has been reluctant to pursue any bills that would call for a dramatic halt to the president’s war strategy by cutting funding.
The House is scheduled to debate the issue for three days next week, beginning Tuesday.
In a statement released by his office Friday, Mr. Hoyer said, “I respect Congressman McGovern’s ideas on Iraq and expect that he will be a critical part of the debate on establishing a new direction for our efforts there.”
Michael Mershon, Mr. McGovern’s spokesman, said Mr. McGovern’s resolution could surface as an amendment.
Mr. McGovern has introduced what he calls the most extreme measure on the table. His bill requires the president to withdraw all U.S. forces within six months and would cut congressional funding for the war after withdrawal is complete. It would transfer authority of U.S. bases to Iraqis, but it would not affect economic or social reconstruction projects, Mr. McGovern said. He introduced the bill in a five-minute speech on the House floor on Jan. 31.
The 10-year House member has long been one of the war’s most vociferous opponents. Now he is trying to collect support for his bill. Twenty-one other congressmen had signed onto the bill as co-sponsors as of Friday evening. They include four Massachusetts Democrats: Barney Frank of Newton, William D. Delahunt of Quincy, John W. Olver of Amherst and Michael E. Capuano of Somerville.
Ronal C. Madnick, an anti-war activist who is executive director of Worcester’s chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union and a member of Worcester Peace Works, said he thinks Mr. McGovern is “absolutely right on this issue.”
“We’re being dragged deeper and deeper into this thing,” Mr. Madnick said. “We’re sending more and more troops, and it was only a matter of time before they started shooting down our planes and helicopters.”
Mr. McGovern said he is not sure how much support he will be able to garner for his bill, which, if it reaches debate on the floor, will be pitted against less extreme measures sponsored by other House Democrats. But at the very least, he is hoping to send a message that Congress will no longer tolerate the president’s “moral blunder” in Iraq.
“There are a lot of bills,” Mr. McGovern said. “My expectation is in the next few months, either as amendments or moving through on their own, there’ll be some attempts to get votes on the House floor.”
Separately, U.S. senators from both sides of the aisle attempted last week to draw up a non-binding resolution to voice their disapproval to Mr. Bush. But debate stalled when Senate Democrats and Republicans failed to find a compromise.
If the House votes on a non-binding resolution, Mr. McGovern said he would vote in favor of it, because it would convey a powerful message. But he said it isn’t enough.
“It would be the first time that any branch of Congress has ever gone on record as being critical of this war,” he said. “Up to this time, Congress has been silent, Congress has been acquiescent.
“I object to the escalation, but I also object to the whole war,” he added.
If and when Mr. McGovern’s proposal comes to the House floor for debate, it may be offered as an amendment to a larger defense or appropriations bill rather than an independent bill.
Mr. McGovern was undeterred by the White House’s statement that congressional resolutions challenging the president’s management of the war send mixed signals overseas.
“I’m more concerned about the men and women over there than about the fact of if I’m on George Bush’s Christmas card list,” he said.
Mr. Madnick said if the House passes a non-binding resolution expressing disapproval over the president’s plan to deploy more troops to Iraq, it would be a “small step” in the right direction.
“I think we should be proud that we have somebody here in central Massachusetts that has the courage to stand up when it’s unpopular and say what he believes,” he added.
-30-
