| Am I being harsh? Perhaps. Maybe it's just the first expression that came to mind. If you're a Vermonter, you probably already know about Sen. Leahy caving in to the right-wing noise machine's phony righteous indignation and voting to condemn MoveOn.org's NYT ad that (perish the thought!) General Westmoreland Petraeus might not actually be so on the level in regards to Iraq. Well, as you now know, the Continuing Resolution that would extend fiscal year 2007 spending at the same levels for 7 weeks into fiscal year 2008 has just passed. And yes, there is Iraq money in there. The MoveOn condemnation was an amendment to that bill. So they stuck it on a must-pass bill, and sadly, Welch and many others didn't attempt to kill the amendment as far as I know. Not good. Welch voted for the bill. |
But there's something else at stake here. You might have remembered not too long ago, Mr. Welch signing on to a letter to Bush written by the Congressional Progressive Caucus that stated, among other things...We are writing to inform you that we will only support appropriating additional funds for U.S. military operations in Iraq during Fiscal Year 2008 and beyond for the protection and safe redeployment of all our troops out of Iraq before you leave office.
Ok, am I nitpicking because we're only talking about 7 weeks in 2008? Perhaps. But interestingly enough, as AfterDowningStreet reports, Tuesday the caucus also released a press statement similar to the letter to Bush, with this particular statement: "We will oppose any bills or amendments brought to the House floor henceforth that pertain specifically to bringing our troops and military contractors home, but do not include in their text a clear timeline and date certain for the redeployment of U.S. troops and military contractors from Iraq."
And as ADS points out: This new version adds contractors but deletes "all." No longer must it be all troops, but it must include (some) contractors. No longer is the deadline January 2009; it could be any deadline as long as there is one. It still says "redeploy" although it also says "bringing...home". But the major change is this one: the new statement SAYS NOTHING ABOUT OPPOSING BILLS TO FUND THE OCCUPATION. As long as such bills do not "pertain specifically to bringing our troops and military contractors home" (and what are the chances of that?) members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus who have not signed the letter above are free, under this new policy position, to vote money for genocide.
Now, I haven't been as much of a hardass on Welch as others have been, probably because I didn't have very high expectations to begin with, coupled with a 'wait-and-see' approach. But I don't like what I'm seeing here. So is the caucus now blinking? And what does Congressman Welch feel about this? What about "No more blank checks. We must end this war." (Welch Press Release, 2/13/2007). Welch has played it safe for too long, and I've told him so, at the BBQ this summer. He knows damn well that he would not feel the repercussions in VT if he had joined his other courageous colleagues (Blumenauer, Clay, Ellison, Filner, Frank (MA), Hinchey, Kucinich, Lee, McDermott, Paul, Payne, Waters, Watson, Woolsey) in voting against this bill. What he fails to realize is that we're not looking for safety; now more than ever we need someone to, as Putney Swope once said, "Don't rock the boat, sink it!" Now, I'm still not in the "crucify Welch" camp just yet, and I've never been a fanboy, either. But this kind of thing is not exactly going to get me looking unfavorably at the "primary challenge" if it indeed rears it's head. I don't know, maybe Welch needs just a little more prodding. Something else to remember, from the article: Let's be clear with the 83 Congress Members who have signed the letter: a new position does not release you from existing commitments. If you have signed this letter, you cannot vote for a bill that funds the occupation without ending it, whether or not that bill pertains specifically to anything at all or doesn't. Most of the signers have already gone back on their word and need to hear from us right away. Welch needs to hear from you right away, too. Drop him a note and tell him to step it up, and to stick with what he signed onto in that letter. Vermonters should expect more from their leaders. |
250-1
55-1
