$95 Billion + Figleaf: Senate Dems Cave On Iraq!

Senate Democrats have apparently decided to disappear the great House bill (which had only 2 months of funding and then a vote in July that might have been the showdown on funding, and then another vote in September that even more likely would've been the showdown to get us out in 2007) and instead want to give Bush a $95 Billion Supplemental:

Next week, the Senate will vote on a new version of the supplemental war funding bill.  We don't know the details yet, but it looks like the Senate will give the President $95 billion for the war without
any fixed timeline for the withdrawal of our troops.  Call your Senator today, and next week to tell them to vote against the supplemental war funding bill, which amounts to a blank check for Bush/Cheney!

By the way, $95 Billion, at $1.9 Billion a week, equals 50 weeks of war funding!

Read the entire Progressive Democrats post. Here's what's the plan is: Reid-Feingold will be [was] the figleaf Democrats use to block criticism of their $95 Billion full funding of the occupation.

Let your Presidential candidate know -- http://www.hillaryclinton.com/  http://www.barackobama.com/  http://www.joebiden.com/  http://www.chrisdodd.com/ -- this will not cut it for you, and your support is on the line.

You are antiwar and voting for the $95 Billion is pro-war. 50 more weeks of pro-war.



Display:


Re: $95 Billion + (none / 0)

FWIW, the Feingold Amendment  failed 29-67.  Democratic Presidential candidates voted solidly for the Amendment (Biden, Clinton, Dodd, Obama).  With a few exceptions, voting was along ideological lines.  Two liberal/progressives voted against the Amendment (Jack Reed and Sander Levin).  Yes votes included Feingold and Byrd (who may be a moderate on everything else but not on war).


by David Kowalski on Wed May 16, 2007 at 01:03:30 PM EST

Re: $95 Billion + Figleaf: Senate Dems Cave On Ira (none / 0)

I'll be contacting my candidate (Obama) and my senator (Amy Klobuchar, who suported Reid-Feingold)

We must fight this. Maybe a filibuster?


"Live your beliefs and you can turn the world around." --Thoreau
by Populista on Wed May 16, 2007 at 01:17:07 PM EST

Wait a little longer. (none / 0)

I think the Dems can get the 60 votes to cut off debate of cutting off funds eventually, but it is nill they can ever get the 67 votes needed to end the war. We will have to wait until the 2008 election to get out of Iraq. Apparently, the Iraq study group had no impact on republicans. They don't want to separate themselves from their republican candidates for president who support the war in Iraq.


by olawakandi on Wed May 16, 2007 at 01:34:49 PM EST

You need majority in the House to end the war (none / 0)

If Bush decides not to veto a short leash with many real conditions funding bill, then he has defunded the troops and ended the occupation. If Bush doesn't veto such a bill, then the conditions and the repeated votes caused by the 'short leash' will likely end the occupation.

60, 60+, 67: that's excuse making.


We can no longer afford to worship the god of hate or bow before the altar of retaliation. Martin Luther King Jr.
by fairleft on Wed May 16, 2007 at 06:14:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]


You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.