March 9, 2007

Iraq

In my last e-update, I told you that the supplemental appropriations bill to continue funding the war in Iraq was expected in committee this week. That did not happen due to continued discussion over how the supplemental should be crafted. The House Democratic Leadership has spent the past week working to build consensus on a course of action. This is not an easy task and I want to commend Speaker Pelosi for the leadership she has shown.

As you know, I want quick action in the House and I want a vote that will get us out of Iraq. As a member of the Progressive Caucus, I have been working with my colleagues to advance a provision that will get us out of Iraq as soon as possible and stipulate that any additional war funding go toward drawing down troops. Regardless, I am pushing as hard as I can to convince the Leadership to at least allow a vote on the Progressive Caucus proposal.

Yesterday, Speaker Pelosi released the U.S. Troop Readiness, Veterans' Health and Iraq Accountability Act. This legislation will be attached as an amendment to the supplemental appropriations bill. It establishes specific benchmarks that Iraqi forces must meet and establishes a "date certain" for troop withdrawal. For a fuller outline of this proposal, please go to the website of the Appropriations Committee.

Most importantly, the legislation stipulates that the withdrawal of troops must begin no later than March 1, 2008 and be completed within 180 days. The benchmarks outlined in the legislation mirror the criteria that President Bush himself set forth in his 2007 State of the Union address. If real progress on these benchmarks is not made by July 1, 2007, then U.S. troop redeployment will begin immediately and must be completed within 180 days.

The Republican Leadership has already announced that they will vote against this proposal because it sets timelines. President Bush has already said that he will veto the bill if it passes. So clearly, the President believes the dates set forth in the proposal mean something.

This issue will dominate debate in the weeks ahead, as it should. I am continuing my efforts on all fronts to convince more and more of my colleagues to bring an end to this war. I am working to get a vote on the Progressive Caucus position but I am not optimistic because if Leadership allows an amendment reflecting this position, then they will have a hard time saying no to other Democratic proposals that may reflect dramatically different views. As I said earlier, I believe that the Progressive Caucus' position will not gain a majority of votes on the floor. However, I fear that any amendment from more conservative Democrats will gain their votes PLUS the votes of Republicans - and, therefore, pass. I am certain that if this were to happen, the resulting bill would be worse than the current proposal. So far, the Democratic Leadership is indicating that they want a clean bill with an up or down vote, which means there will be no amendments allowed.

I am carefully weighing this proposal. It does not go far enough for me, but I know that my position cannot muster 218 votes. This proposal brings us closer than we have ever been to ending this war, and it clearly must carry weight -- practically and symbolically - or the President would not have reacted so strongly or so quickly.

I will continue to keep you posted on these fast moving events and will of course report on the final vote, which we expect will occur by the end of March.

Recent Votes

This week the House considered H.R. 569: The Water Quality Investment Act of 2007, legislation introduced by Rep. Pascrell (N.J.), Rep. Camp (Mich.) and myself earlier this year. The legislation authorizes funds for the Environmental Protection Agency's "sewer overflow control grants." The grants are available to states and municipalities to make improvements to their sewer and water treatment systems and to help address combined sewer overflows (CSOs). CSOs occur when the amount of rain or melting snow is too much for a water treatment system to handle, resulting in the overflow of untreated water. This issue can be a particular problem in communities with older infrastructure, including many communities in Massachusetts. I voted YES. The entire vote is recorded below:

This week, the House also considered H.R. 700: Healthy Communities Water Supply Act of 2007. This bill authorizes $125 million for projects that seek to increase our useable water supply through conservation efforts and reclamation projects. I voted YES. The entire vote is recorded below:

H.R. 720 Reauthorizes the Clean Water State Revolving Loan Fund. This program has been cut in the past but the Democratic-led Congress believes that it should be a priority. This bill provides cities and towns with access to funds so that they can improve their wastewater treatment facilities. I voted YES. The entire vote is recorded below:

As you may recall, I was recently appointed to the House Committee on Administration. On Thursday, the House considered H.Res. 202: Providing for the expenses of certain committees of the House of Representatives in the 110th Congress. This bill reflects one of the main functions of my new committee assignment: overseeing general administrative functions of the House. This legislation sets the budgets for most of the House Committees. I voted YES. The entire vote is recorded below:

What's Up Next

Next week, the House will consider legislation from the Oversight and Government Reform Committee.