[Pacg] More Contact info on War Funding Vote

[Carolina 1961]

Tell our representatives we expect them to attach timelines to any more
funding for the war in Iraq.

Share this with your friends and family. Tell the offices that you live in
the district.

Democrats in Congress are poised to cave in and give the president another
blank check for the war in Iraq. Can you call your Congressman and Senators
right away and tell them to oppose any deal that does not include a firm
timeline to end the war?
*Congressman Bruce Braley
Phone:  (202) 225-2911  Phone: 563-323-5988
*
*Congressman Phil Hare
Phone:  202-225-5905  Phone: 309-793-5760
* *Senator Tom Harkin:
DC Office 202-224-3254, Davenport - 563-322-1338
* *Senator Charles Grassley
DC Office 202-224-3744, Davenport 563-322-4331
* *Senator Dick Durbin  DC 202-224-2152
* *Senator Barack Obama  DC  202-224-2854*
**
Last month, Majority Leader Reid and other Democratic leaders drew a line in
the sand. They said there would be no more funding for the war in Iraq
unless it was attached to a timeline for withdrawal.1 And they told
President Bush that they were standing firm.

Well, now it looks like they're poised to cave in and give the president
another blank check. According to the Washington Post, Democrats have
apparently worked out a "deal" to give President Bush billions of dollars
more for Iraq—no strings attached—in exchange for increased domestic
spending.

Every Democrat in Congress needs to hear a groundswell of concern from their
constituents. Can you call our representatives and tell them to oppose any
deal that does not include a firm timeline to end the war? Tell them that
voters are counting on Congress to keep their word and stand up to the
president—not capitulate, again.

Why is this happening again? When Democrats get tough with the president on
Iraq he usually accuses them of hurting the troops. This time, he has been
threatening to lay off military personnel and blame the Democrats. Once
again, Democrats got nervous and backed down.
The Democrats need to know that voters are counting on them to confront the
president's scare tactics head on.

Here's how the New York Times explained their latest "compromise":2

The decision to free some money for the war without a deadline or goal for
withdrawal would represent a major concession by Democrats. They had earlier
said they would not send Mr. Bush any more war money this year unless he
accepted a change in Iraq policy. But Democratic leaders now say they have
concluded that a logjam of 11 appropriations bills cannot be broken without
acceding to at least some of the president's demand for more war money.

What we need to make clear to them is that you can't cut deals when it comes
to war. There is no trade-off between getting our troops out of a religious
civil war in Iraq and making progress on priorities here at home.

Democrats need to stand up and say that it's the president who is hurting
our troops. He has them bogged down in an un-winnable civil war, with no end
in sight. When he refuses to sign war funding bills that contain measures
that would correct his reckless policy, he is the one who is keeping our
troops and the Iraqis at risk.

Thanks for all you do.
Source material  MoveOn.org

Sources:

1. "Hill Close to Deal on War Funds," Washington Post, December 8, 2007
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=3257&id=11771-2761442-cEe9hZ&t=3
2. "Budget Makers Plan Tradeoff for War Funds," New York Times, December 7,
2007
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=3256&id=11771-2761442-cEe9hZ&t=4


Thanks,

Cath
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.qcprogressiveaction.org/pipermail/pacg/attachments/20071210/b7291b4b/attachment.htm