Smith Votes Against War Supplemental
This afternoon, the U.S. House of Representatives passed the compromise version of the emergency war supplemental bill, which would fund the President’s military policies in Iraq through September. Adam voted against this measure and released the following statement:
“This was an agonizingly difficult vote for me. I was forced to choose between two options when I supported neither.
I support a phased withdrawal from Iraq over the course of the next year, leaving the much smaller number of troops necessary to train Iraqi forces and confront the threat posed by Al Qaeda in Iraq. I believe our occupation both makes it more difficult for Iraq to reach a political solution to their conflict and undermines our broader, global efforts to fight Al Qaeda, the ideology they espouse, and those who follow either or both. And it is painfully clear at this point that U.S. troops in any number cannot stop or even significantly reduce the violence in Iraq.
We should be more focused on confronting Al Qaeda in Afghanistan, Pakistan, throughout Africa and all the other places where they are attempting to gain power. This is an effort that would mainly involve diplomacy, and a comprehensive effort to defeat this dangerous ideology by understanding local cultures and winning the battle of ideas. In certain situations and locations, it also involves small scale military actions. The broader efforts that I’m describing are in fact undermined by our presence in Iraq. We should not have nearly 200,000 U.S. troops bogged down in the middle of a civil war in Iraq, occupying a Muslim country and further inflaming the already tense relationship between the Muslim world and the West.
I have voted for bills that, to varying degrees, supported this vital new direction in Iraq several times. The President vetoed one such bill, the Senate did not pass another, and a third did not get the votes to pass the House.
I do not, however, believe that we should cut off funding for our troops while the President stubbornly insists on keeping them there. There is an enormous difference between the phased withdrawal described above, and a chaotic retreat driven by a lack of funding or a situation where our troops must continue to fight despite not having the resources they need.
The big difference of opinion in this debate at this point is over when precisely our troops will begin to lack the resources they need if we in Congress have not passed this supplemental funding bill.
Some have argued that the Pentagon has the legal power to borrow as much money as they need no matter what Congress does. Whether true or not I do not want to set the precedent that our military can go on fighting on borrowed money even if Congress stops appropriating money for whatever war is being fought.
Even without this borrowing authority, most agree our military has adequate resources until mid-July without impacting military readiness. After that time, a lack of new funds could begin progressively to affect military readiness as bases in the U.S. would have to start cutting or delaying non-war related budget items – from equipment repairs to facilities upkeep – in order to fund operations in Iraq.
So that is the choice this vote presented. Continue funding a horribly flawed policy or run the risk of leading the military to have to tighten its belt here at home.
I ultimately decided to vote no on the legislation in order to keep the pressure on the President and his Republican supporters in Congress over the next several weeks. I believe we must do everything we can to change the course in Iraq, and Congress should keep pushing for that change as long as our troops won’t be harmed by the lack of funds.
This vote is one more step in the ongoing debate regarding how best to redeploy our troops from Iraq – it is the latest, but not the final, say on this critically important issue. I fully expect this matter to come before the Congress again in the coming weeks and months. I will continue to work to ensure that our troops are not only protected but also able to exit Iraq quickly and safely.”
Smith Sees Labor and Environmental Protections As Major Step Forward
Last week, Adam applauded the new labor and environmental protections secured by the Democratic Congress on trade policy. The framework announced last week does not equate to Congressional approval for any specific free trade agreements, but rather establishes a minimum set of new, higher standards on fundamental workers’ rights, environmental protections, and a number of other critical Democratic priorities.
Under the framework, established after weeks of Congressional consultations with labor unions and other key stakeholders, any free trade agreement to be considered by Congress must, at a minimum, include provisions that will:
- Protect and enforce fundamental international labor standards;
- Protect and enforce basic environmental standards;
- Speed the delivery of generic drugs;
- Empower U.S. state and federal governments to use labor standards and acceptable work and wage conditions as criteria for the approval of procurement contracts; and
- Protect U.S. investors’ rights within the United States.
“This agreement raises the bar and sets a new framework for trade agreements to include enforceable labor and environmental standards. For the first time, our bilateral trade agreements will require our trading partners to protect and enforce fundamental International Labor Organization (ILO) standards. This is a major step forward. We Democrats stood our ground with Republicans and the Administration and got everything we asked for.”
“At the same time, this framework is by no means going to solve the economic problems faced by working families in our country. Congress must continue to work for better health care, job training, education, and fairer wages to ensure broader economic opportunity and make our workers more competitive in the global economy. I look forward to continuing to advance that progressive agenda in Congress.”
House Passes Gasoline Price Gouging Ban
Yesterday, the U.S. House of Representatives passed the Federal Price Gouging Prevention Act (H.R. 1252) with Adam’s support. It was brought to the floor under suspension of the rules – a procedure that limits debate, bars amendments and requires a two-thirds majority for passage. Despite threats of a presidential veto, it passed by 284-141.
Endorsed by Moveon.org, H.R. 1252 would ban the sale of gasoline and other liquid fuels at prices that are “unconscionably excessive” during an “energy emergency”, as declared by the President. Furthermore, it would grant the Federal Trade Commission authority to fine violators up to $150 million for corporations and $2 million for individuals and seek criminal penalties of up to ten years in prison.
“While not a perfect bill, yesterday’s efforts to investigate potential price gouging with the powers to penalize violators is a step in the right direction. Americans undoubtedly need relief from rising energy costs. I hope future Congressional efforts will also look at the role alternative transportation fuels and tougher federal fuel efficiency standards can play in reducing the financial burden,” Adam stated.
Smith Expresses “No Confidence” in U.S. Attorney General Gonzales
This week, Adam cosponsored House Resolution 417 expressing no confidence in the performance of United States Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, and urging the President to request his resignation.
Introduced by Representatives Adam Schiff (CA) and Artur Davis (AL), both former Assistant U.S. Attorneys, the resolution reads:
Whereas at this critical time in the Nation's history when the American people confront unprecedented challenges posed by global terrorism, when so many critical issues remain to be addressed at home, and when it is essential that the Nation has the service of an Attorney General who has the full confidence of the American people to enforce the law, to defend the United States from foreign and domestic threats, to prevent crime, to seek punishment for those guilty of committing crimes, and to ensure the fair and impartial administration of justice for all Americans; and
Whereas Attorney General Alberto Gonzales has failed to adequately and properly manage the Department of Justice and faithfully execute the duties of his office, as reflected in his mismanagement of the dismissal of United States attorneys, the conflicting and incomplete testimony before Congress by the Attorney General and his top aides, and his inability to assure the public that the laws of the Nation are being enforced in an independent, nonpartisan, and judicious manner: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved, That the House of Representatives and the American people have lost confidence in Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, and urge the President to request his resignation and to nominate a new candidate more capable of serving as the head of the Department of Justice.
If you have questions or comments please contact Chelsea Orvella, Senior Field Representative, at 253.896.3784 or via email at Chelsea.Orvella@mail.house.gov.
|
| |
| The Honorable Adam Smith | The Honorable Adam Smith |
No comments:
Post a Comment