opinion

Also in this section:

Bernal, Where is Panama headed?
G. W. Bush, Progress in Iraq
Mikulski, Remove the gag on the Iraq War debate
Wayne, Guantanamo and the semantics of terror
N. Jackson, Read and weep
Human Rights Watch, A Chilean judge's bad decision on Fujimori's extradition
Silié, Peace with poverty isn't peace
Pilgrim, Sao Paulo air crash raises deadly questions

Sánchez, Hispaniola as a major drug smuggling hub

Hill, Free trade and immigration

Gutman, Hugo Chávez is a disgrace

Shelton, A better plan for the canal's expansion

E. Jackson, Troubles at the alma mater

Sirias, The price of perfection

Remove the gag on Iraq War debate

by US Senator Barbara Mikulski (D-MD)

The following is a speech on the Senate floor during the debate on an amendment to the Defense Authorization Bill that would have mandated a timetable for US troop withdrawal from Iraq. In procedural wrangling a vote on that amendment was prevented.

I never thought I would see a day in the United States Senate where there would be essentially a gag rule on the subject of war --- a gag rule preventing us from voting on the deployment of our troops and a framework for them to be able to come home.

We’re supposed to be the world’s greatest deliberative body, but the other party has chosen to throw sand in the gears in order to keep us from a vote where we would present a framework for a new way forward in Iraq.

The previous speaker said that we Democrats present a ‘strategy du jour’ on the war. Well I challenge that statement and say it is the White House that gives us the ‘strategy du jour,’ the strategy of the week, always changing goals. When we first went to war, it was to get rid of Saddam Hussein and get rid of Weapons of Mass Destruction. Saddam’s gone. There were no Weapons of Mass Destruction. If that was the goal of the war, then our troops should come back home. Then it was to create democracy in Iraq. Now it’s to secure Baghdad.

So we’ve got to come up with the right kind of framework. But we also need to be able to have our votes. Forty-seven times this year, the Republican minority has threatened a filibuster on a variety of bills that we wanted to bring up on both domestic and foreign policy. Forty-seven times they’ve blocked votes. Now they’ve gone too far. Now the other party refuses to give us a vote on the most important issue that we face – the War in Iraq and the deployment of our troops.

Now our president talks about building a democratic Iraq. We should start with building democracy right here in the United States Senate. Our democracy is built on fundamental principles. One of those fundamental principles is freedom of speech --- but not in the Senate. We’re in a gag rule. We face strong-arm tactics to prevent a vote on a troop deadline. Another fundamental principle of democracy is majority rule --- but not in the United States Senate. It now takes 60 votes to win a vote.

We want to end the war. They want to hide behind parliamentary procedure. We want to go directly to the vote. Our constitution calls for a system of checks and balances. But that’s not what the White House wants. They want us to write the checks. But tonight, we’re trying to provide the balance. So that’s why we stand here the way we do.

Now some people say Democrats are micromanaging the war. Hey, someone’s got to manage it, and it’s about time. For the last five years, Congress has been under the rule of the other party. It’s been a rubber stamp for the Bush administration. The results have been devastating to our military, to America’s standing in the world, to the Iraqi people. We had troops sent to battle with inadequate protection and no plan for victory. We had modest international support, and now that’s dwindling. Our former Secretary of Defense was imperious and turned a blind eye to cronyism and corruption at every level of the reconstruction.

You know what? It is time for someone to manage the war, and we’re ready to do it. We’re ready to lead. We just need to have our vote. Now it’s time to stop talking. It’s time for action. And it’s time for the Senate to have their say and their day and vote.

This isn’t about theater, polls or politics. It’s about the will of the American people, about honoring our democratic principles. It’s about doing the job we were elected to do. Now, I support the bipartisan amendment of Levin, Reed and Hagel because it brings our troops home safely and swiftly.

The Iraqis must understand that the future of their nation is in their hands. Our troops must understand that Congress will never abandon them – not while they are fighting on the battlefield, and not when they come home. But we believe the best way to support our troops is to create a framework to bring them home swiftly and safely.

There are those who want to talk about alternatives. There are those who are blocking a vote on this amendment saying, ‘it’s too soon to withdraw.’ They have suddenly discovered the recommendations of the Iraq Study Group, that I supported seven months ago --- 210 days ago. The Iraq Study Group gave us a framework. They had 79 recommendations. I stood on this floor and said ‘out of the 79, certainly there were 60 we could agree with. Let’s have a meeting. Let’s pick our favorite 60 and start moving forward on a military solution, a political solution, a diplomatic solution. But it was dismissed by the other party and it was dismissed by the President of the United States. So now all of a sudden they have found the Iraq Study Group? Seven months ago the Iraq Study Group called for diplomatic and political efforts. I think we should do that. I also think that’s included in the spirit and substance of the Levin-Reed amendment.

Now is the time to refocus our mission in Iraq. I’m not new to this position. I never wanted to go to war in the first place. I read all those intelligence reports and I never believed that the President should be granted unilateral authority to engage in a war where there was no eminent threat to the United States of America. I was one of 23. Four years ago on October 11, I opposed the President getting this authority and asked that we exhaust our diplomatic options, asked to stick with the UN I said ‘I’m just so concerned, so concerned that I don’t know if our troops will be met with parades or landmines.’

We know where we are. We went to war with Iraq and now we are at war within Iraq. Saddam is gone but we are still there, mired in a civil war. Our troops have been brave and followed the request of their Commander-in-Chief. We need to be able to look out for them. I believe we will, particularly with the Wounded Warriors provision in this bill, which I co-sponsored.

It is time for us to have this vote. It is time for the Iraqi-elected officials to stand up. Members of the Iraqi Parliament no longer attend Cabinet meetings and so many are boycotting their own parliament, they cannot get a quorum --- whether it is for decisions on oil revenue sharing or power sharing.

It’s time now for us to have our vote. It’s time to refocus the mission. It’s time to redeploy our troops. It’s time to bring our troops home by April 30, 2008 and that is why it is time to vote on the Levin-Reed amendment.

Bernal, Where is Panama headed?
G. W. Bush, Progress in Iraq
Mikulski, Remove the gag on the Iraq War debate
Wayne, Guantanamo and the semantics of terror
N. Jackson, Read and weep
Human Rights Watch, A Chilean judge's bad decision on Fujimori's extradition
Silié, Peace with poverty isn't peace
Pilgrim, Sao Paulo air crash raises deadly questions

Sánchez, Hispaniola as a major drug smuggling hub

Hill, Free trade and immigration

Gutman, Hugo Chávez is a disgrace

Shelton, A better plan for the canal's expansion

E. Jackson, Troubles at the alma mater

Sirias, The price of perfection