You are hereCongress

Congress


Congress 'Un-Declares' War with Iran

All 535 members of Congress are now on the record declaring that they have not authorized the use of military force against Iran in the latest round of legislation passed in the House and the Senate. This unanimous 'un-declaration' of war by Congress is a crucial victory, with particular significance given its passage on the eve of the U.S.-Iran talks in Baghdad.

The House was the first chamber to 'un-declare war', with its inclusion of a proviso in the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) that this legislation does not authorize war with Iran. This stipulation that "nothing in this Act shall be construed as authorizing the use of force against Iran" is a remarkably sober note of caution and common sense in an otherwise dangerous and reckless piece of legislation. The NDAA allocates billions of dollars of weapons that could be used for an attack on Iran and requires the administration to prepare for war and dramatically escalate the U.S. militarization of the Middle East. Notably, the NDAA exceeds the limitations on Pentagon spending that Congress agreed to in the Budget Control Act by about $8 billion--much of which is allotted for the anti-Iran weaponry.

Rep. John Conyers (MI) championed this amendment to 'un-declare' war with Iran with a bipartisan group of representatives: Rep. Ron Paul (TX), Rep. Keith Ellison (MN), and Rep. Walter Jones (NC). In less than a week, Congress received more than 1,000 calls through FCNL's toll-free number from grassroots activists across the country who support this and other anti-war, pro-peace amendments that FCNL was working on. Partly as a result of your advocacy against war with Iran, the Conyers/Paul/Ellison/Jones amendment was considered so uncontroversial that it made its way into the NDAA as part of a package (called 'en bloc amendments') of non-controversial amendments, rather than going to the House floor for a separate vote.

US House Stealthily Passes Extreme Pro-Israel Legislation

by Philip Giraldi

 

Go to Google and type in “H.R. 4133.” You will discover that, apart from a handful of blogs and alternative news sites, not a single mainstream medium has reported the story of a congressional bill that might well have major impact on the conduct of United States foreign policy.

H.R. 4133, the United States-Israel Enhanced Security Cooperation Act of 2012, was introduced into the House of Representatives of the 112th Congress on March 5 “to express the sense of Congress regarding the United States-Israel strategic relationship, to direct the president to submit to Congress reports on United States actions to enhance this relationship and to assist in the defense of Israel, and for other purposes.” The American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) reportedly helped draft the bill, and its co-sponsors include Republicans Eric Cantor and Ileana Ros-Lehtinen and Democrats Howard Berman and Steny Hoyer. Hoyer is the Democratic whip in the House of Representatives, where Cantor is majority leader. Ros-Lehtinen heads the Foreign Affairs Committee.

The House bill basically provides Israel with a blank check drawn on the U.S. taxpayer to maintain its “qualitative military edge” over all of its neighbors combined. It requires the White House to prepare an annual report on how that superiority is being maintained. The resolution passed on May 9 by a vote of 411–2 on a “suspension of the rules,” which is intended for non-controversial legislation requiring little debate and a quick vote.

READ THE REST.

NDAA Reignites Cold War with Russia, Opens Door for Hot War with Iran

WASHINGTON, D.C. (May 18, 2012) -- Congressman Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) today released the following statement after Congress passed H.R. 4310, the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year 2013.

“In addition to language saber-rattling and preparing for war with Iran, the FY013 NDAA includes language that could undermine our diplomatic relationship with Russia and thwart the implementation of the historic Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START) follow-on. For example, the House accepted an amendment that adds to efforts to delay the implementation of START by preventing any reductions to our nuclear arsenal until the Secretary of Defense reports to Congress on Russia’s compliance with the Treaty. 

“Another such amendment, adopted by voice vote in the middle of the night, singles out Russia by limiting the availability of funds for Cooperative Threat Reduction Activities with Russia until the Secretary of Defense ‘can certify that Russia is no longer supporting the Syrian regime and is not providing to Syria, North Korea or Iran any equipment or technology that contributes to the development of weapons of mass destruction.’ 

”Put simply, these are ploys to delay the Defense Department’s ability to implement the nuclear arms reductions as required by the START Treaty and will only raise tensions with our Russian ally,” said Kucinich.

“We should be working cooperatively with Russia to not only reduce arms but to abolish all nuclear weapons.”


Lee Opposes National Defense Reauthorization Bill

Lee Calls for Cuts to Bloated Pentagon Budget, Swift Withdrawal from Afghanistan

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, Congresswoman Barbara Lee (D-CA) was one of 120 Members of Congress to vote against H.R. 4310, the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA).  Lee offered amendments to the bill which would safely and responsibly bring our troops home from Afghanistan, keep Pentagon spending within the limits of the Budget Control Act, and ensure that a meaningful diplomatic option with Iran is on the table.

Lee introduced an amendment to enforce the terms of the Budget Control Act which was signed into law on August 2, 2011, to avert a government shutdown.  Congress voted to limit Pentagon spending, but the House Republican leadership proposal spends$8 billion more than allowed under the Budget Control Act.  The bi-partisan amendment was not adopted (170-252). 

“If you Want Peace, Prepare for Peace. If you Want War, Prepare for War. The NDAA Prepares for War with Iran,” Kucinich.

WASHINGTON, D.C. (May 18, 2012) – Today the House is expected to vote on H.R. 4310, the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year 2013. Kucinich took to the House Floor to warn Members of the Congress that the bill prepares the United States for war with Iran. It specifically calls for aggressive deployment of our armed services to begin “credible, visible preparations for a military option.”

See video here. Kucinich’s remarks follow:

“If you want peace, you prepare for peace. If you want war, you prepare for war. The NDAA prepares for war against Iran.

“It calls for pre-positioning planes, bombs, ships, munitions and for naval maneuvers in the Strait of Hormuz. [Sec. 1221 (b) and Sec. 1222 (A)]  This is not about defense. This is about offense.

“I was a third string quarterback on not a very good varsity football team and I know the difference between defense and offense. We’re preparing to go on offense on Iran which does not have nuclear weapons and has no intention or real capability to attack the United States.

“We're about to make the same disastrous mistake we made against Iraq. This bill does not explicitly authorize war, perhaps, but that's beside the point. It’s licensing it. It sets the stage for it in an election year.

“Wake up, Congress.”

Kucinich has been educating fellow Members about the bill this week. See video of Congressman Kucinich on the House Floor here, here and here. See a flyer that Congressman Kucinich distributed to Members here

 

###

113 in House Vote to End War on Afghanistan -- How Many Will Vote Against the NDAA?

Lee amendment for swift withdrawal from Afghanistan falls short in House vote

WASHINGTON – Today, Congresswoman Barbara Lee (D-CA) introduced an amendment to H.R. 4310, the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), that would bring about a responsible and immediate end to the war in Afghanistan. The amendment would end combat operations at the same time it protects troops by requiring that any dollar directed to Afghanistan could only be spent for the safe and orderly withdrawal of U.S. troops and military contractors.  The amendment did not pass the House (113-303).

“The American people have overwhelmingly come to the conclusion that our brave men and women in uniform have accomplished all that we have asked of them and it is time to bring them home from Afghanistan,” said Congresswoman Lee.  “My amendment provided Members of the House the opportunity to stand squarely with the war-weary American people.  I am disappointed that a majority of House Members did not stand with seven out of ten Americans who oppose the war in Afghanistan.”

On Wednesday, Congresswoman Lee was joined by 100 Members of the House, including five Republicans, in sending a letter to President Obama urging an expedited withdrawal of U.S. military forces from Afghanistan n advance of the NATO summit. 

“Our brave troops have done everything that was asked of them,” said Congresswoman Lee.  “With almost two thousand U.S. troops killed in Afghanistan, and many tens of thousands more maimed with injuries both hidden and visible, we must recognize that the boots on the ground strategy in Afghanistan is not working.  After 11 long years of war, I will continue to work to bring the troops home from Afghanistan.”     

###

Today’s House Floor speech: here

Link to letter to President Obama: here

Text of the Lee Amendment:

AMENDMENT TO H.R. 4310, AS REPORTED

OFFERED BY MS. LEE OF CALIFORNIA

At the end of subtitle B of title XII of division A of the bill, add the following:

Sec. 12xx. LIMITATION ON FUNDS FOR OPERATIONS OF THE ARMED FORCES IN AFGHANISTAN.

            (a) IN GENERAL --- Funds made available to carry out this Act for operations of the Armed Forces in Afghanistan shall be obligated an expended only for purpose of providing for the safe and orderly withdrawal from Afghanistan of all members of the Armed Forces and Department of Defense contractor personnel who are in Afghanistan.

            (b) RULE OF CONSTRUCTION --- Nothing in this section shall be construed –

(1)   To authorize the use of funds for the continuation of combat operations in Afghanistan while carrying out the safe and orderly withdrawal from Afghanistan of all members of the Armed Forces and Department of Defense contractor personnel who are in Afghanistan; and

(2)   To prohibit or otherwise restrict the use of funds available to any department or agency of the United States to carry out diplomatic efforts or humanitarian, development, or general reconstruction activities in Afghanistan.

War with Iran Devastating to American Interests; NDAA Paves the Way to War

Washington D.C. (May 17, 2012) – Congressman Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) is urging Members to reject H.R. 4310, the National Defense Authorization Act, FY 2013 because it prepares the way for a disastrous war with Iran. Even if the House accepts a proposed amendment by John Conyers (D-MI) to state that the authorization is not a specific declaration of war, the bill still calls for aggressive redeployment of our armed services to begin “credible, visible preparations for a military option.”

Kucinich addressed the House Floor moments ago.

“To start the war in Iraq, Congress was lied to.

“To start the war in Afghanistan, Congress was misled.

“To start the war in Libya, Congress was ignored.

“To start the war in Iran, language has been hidden in the NDAA.

“The NDAA prepares for war against Iran. It has a declaration of policy which includes military action. It has a plan to pre-position aircraft, munitions and fuel for air and sea-based missions. It has a plan for maintaining sufficient naval assets in the region to launch a sustained sea and air campaign against a range of Iranian nuclear and military targets. This bill prepares for war.

“Some will say this bill doesn't authorize for war. This bill prepares for war. Even if it's amended, it prepares for war and we need to vote the bill down because it prepares for war with Iran which would be devastating to this country's interest.”

If Anyone Was Going to Vote Against War Authorization and Funding It'd Be These 91 Congress Members. Don't Hold Your Breath.

Congresswoman Barbara Lee Urges Congress to End the War in Afghanistan

Lee leads bi-partisan group of 91 Representatives in penning letter to President 

WASHINGTON – Today 91 Members of the House of Representatives, led by Barbara Lee (D-CA), sent a letter to President Obama urging an expedited withdrawal of U.S. military forces from Afghanistan.  Ninety Members of the House of Representatives signed the letter, including four Republicans.  The Congresswoman was joined by a dozen colleagues at a morning press conference. 

“Today, I am announcing that 90 Members of Congress are joining me in requesting that President Obama expedite our troops’ return and speed up the transition to having Afghans in charge of Afghanistan,” said Congresswoman Lee.  “The American people have overwhelmingly come to the conclusion that our brave men and women in uniform have accomplished all that we have asked of them and it is time to bring them home from Afghanistan.”

Today, the House of Representatives is scheduled to begin debate on the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), which provides war funding, at the same time President Obama prepares for the NATO summit in Chicago.  The bi-partisan group of Members outlined the need to make a change in policy in Afghanistan.

“I believe that it is time for Members of Congress to stand with seven out of ten Americans who oppose the war in Afghanistan,” said Congresswoman Lee.  “There is no military solution in Afghanistan, which is why I am pushing Republican leadership to allow me to offer an amendment to the NDAA that would bring about a responsible and immediate end to the war in Afghanistan.  The amendment would end combat operations while protecting our troops by ensuring that any dollar directed to Afghanistan can only be spent for the safe and orderly withdrawal of U.S. troops and military contractors.”  

Congresswoman Lee was joined by Representatives Walter Jones (R-NC), Ron Paul (R-TX), Jerrold Nadler (D-NY), Laura Richardson (D-CA), Janice Hahn (D-CA), Lynn Woolsey (D-CA), Peter Welch (D-NY), and James McGovern (D-MA).  Congresswoman Lee thanked her colleagues for joining her at the press conference, noting that “the silence on Capitol Hill on this issue has been deafening.” 

 

###

 

Link to press release with photo here.

Copy of letter below:

 

May 16, 2012

 

The Honorable Barack Obama

President of the United States

1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW

Washington, DC  20500

 

Dear President Obama:

Earlier this month you visited Afghanistan to sign a Strategic Partnership Agreement.  As you stated at Bagram Air Base, “this time of war began in Afghanistan, and this is where it will end.” The core of al Qaeda has been greatly reduced in size and ability to attack Americans. Our brave men and women in uniform have done everything that we have asked of them. With over 17,000 dead and wounded U.S. servicemen and women, and long term costs estimated at $4 trillion for the past decade of unfunded wars, the overwhelming majority of American people want to bring the war in Afghanistan to an expedited end.

While many of us would prefer an immediate full withdrawal from Afghanistan, there is broad, bipartisan consensus in Congress and across America that it is time to accelerate the transition from U.S. to full Afghan control.  We also remind you that any agreement committing U.S. troops to Afghanistan must have congressional approval to be binding.

Therefore, at the upcoming NATO summit in Chicago, we ask that you announce an accelerated transition of security responsibility to the Afghan government and security forces and the expedited withdrawal of our troops from Afghanistan as quickly as these can be safely and responsibly accomplished.


Sincerely,
Members of Congress

Current Signers (91): Adam Smith, Becerra, Baldwin, Bass, Blumenauer, Boswell, Braley, Campbell, Capps, Castor, Chu, Cicilline, Yvette Clarke, Clay, Cleaver, Clyburn, Cohen, Conyers, Costello, Courtney, Cummings, John Duncan, DeFazio, DeLauro, Edwards, Ellison, Farr, Filner, Frank, Garamendi, Grijalva, Gutierrez, Hahn, Hanabusa, Alcee Hastings, Heinrich, Hinchey, Holt, Honda, Jackson Jr., Eddie Bernice Johnson, Hank Johnson, Tim Johnson, Kucinich, Rick Larsen, John Larson, Barbara Lee, Lewis, Loebsack, Lofgren, Lujan, Maloney, Markey, McCollum, McDermott, McGovern, Michaud, George Miller, Moran, Moore, Chris Murphy, Nadler, Napolitano, Olver, Pastor, Paul, Pingree, Polis, Quigley, Rangel, Richardson, Rush, Loretta Sanchez, Schakowsky, Schiff, Serrano, Sherman, Sires, Slaughter, Speier, Stark, Mike Thompson, Tierney, Tonko, Towns, Tsongas, Velazquez, Waters, Watt, Waxman, Welch, Woolsey, Yarmuth.

Here Are 87 Congress Members Claiming to Want Out of Afghanistan: Guess How Many Will Vote for Bill That Funds Staying

Current Co-Signers (86): Adam Smith, Bacerra, Baldwin, Bass, Blumenauer, Boswell, Braley, Capps, Castor, Chu, Cicilline, Yvette Clarke, Clay, Cleaver, Clyburn, Cohen, Conyers, Costello, Courtney, John Duncan, DeFazio, DeLauro, Edwards, Ellison, Farr, Filner, Frank, Garamendi, Grijalva, Gutierrez, Hahn, Hanabusa, Alcee Hastings, Heinrich, Hinchey, Holt, Honda, Jackson Jr., Eddie Bernice Johnson, Hank Johnson, Tim Johnson, Kucinich, Rick Larsen, John Larson, Lewis, Loebsack, Lofgren, Lujan, Maloney, McCollum, McDermott, McGovern, Michaud, George Miller, Moran, Moore, Chris Murphy, Nadler, Napolitano, Olver, Pastor, Paul, Pingree, Polis, Rangel, Richardson, Rush, Loretta Sanchez, Schakowsky, Serrano, Sherman, Slaughter, Speier, Stark, Mike Thompson, Tierney, Tonko, Towns, Tsongas, Waters, Watt, Waxman, Welch, Woolsey, Yarmuth.

Lead Signer: Barbara Lee

Members of Congress Urge Expedited Withdrawal from Afghanistan  

Washington, D.C.Congresswoman Barbara Lee (D-CA) and Members of Congress from both political parties will hold a press conference in support of expedited withdrawal of US troops from Afghanistan on Wednesday, May 16, 2012, at 10:00 a.m. EST.  As President Obama prepares to address the NATO summit, Members will address the growing opposition among Americans and announce the opening of a letter to be delivered to the President urging expedited withdrawal.  Eighty-seven Members of the House have signed the letter, including 4 Republicans. 

WHO:              U.S. Rep. Barbara Lee (D-CA)

                        U.S. Rep. Walter Jones (R-NC)

                        U.S. Rep. Pete Stark (D-CA)

U.S. Rep. Peter Welch (D-VT)

U.S. Rep. Lynn Woolsey (D-CA)

U.S. Rep. James McGovern (D-MA)

U.S. Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-NY)

U.S. Rep. Janice Hahn (D-CA)

U.S. Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-OH)

                        U.S. Rep. Timothy V. Johnson (R-IL)

                        U.S. Rep. John Conyers (D-MI)

U.S. Rep. Sam Farr (D-CA)

                        U.S. Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-NY)

                        U.S. Rep. Laura Richardson (D-CA)

           

WHAT:             Press Conference

 

WHEN:             Wednesday, May 16, 2012, at 10:00 a.m. EST

 

WHERE:           HVC-117, Studio B


$642 billion for the Military? This year? You must be kidding!

The FY 2013 military budget (NDAA) is up for a vote in the House this Friday. It contains more than $642 billion of taxpayer money to pay for a war the majority of Americans oppose; nuclear upgrades that threaten non-proliferation agreements; programs and weapons that even the Pentagon doesn't want. The bill also promotes reckless threats on Iran, enables reckless actions by Israel and prohibits the transfer of prisoners from Guantanamo to the United States.
 
It's not just the Republicans, who are at fault. The majority of Democrats on the House Armed Services Committee have voted in favor, producing a lopsided 56-5 margin for an outrageous bill. Partisan rhetoric should not obscure the reality that if this over-sized military budget passes the Congress, it will be paid for by programs that affect the most vulnerable- food stamps, school lunches, health insurance for low income children, "Meals-on Wheels" for the elderly.
 
With $88 billion authorized to continue the war in Afghanistan. Barbara Lee has introduced a clear amendment (#158) to cut all funding except for the purpose of withdrawing all of our troops safely from Afghanistan. Representatives McGovern, Conyers, Kucinich, Frank and others have introduced strong amendments aimed at stopping the war, preventing a military confrontation with Iran, curtailing the use of drones and cutting the size of the budget. (Not certain which of these amendments the Republican majority will allow on the floor.)
 
Members of Congress need to hear from you today
 
Call the Capitol Switchboard 1-877-429-0678. *toll free number provided by FCNL)
 
 
*Ask your Representatives to support ALL amendments designed to end the war in Afghanistan, avoid a military intervention in Iran, curtail drone attacks and eliminate waste, fraud and abuse in the military budget.
 
 
*And when it comes time for a vote on the entire Pentagon budget bill (H.R. 4310) let your Representative know that the FY 2013 National Defense Authorization Act does not reflect the priorities of their constituents. The only reasonable vote on a $642 billion Pentagon bill is a NO vote.
 
 
Please circulate this message widely to family and friends.
And please share any feedback rustiandgael@unitedforpeace.org

Members of Congress Urge Expedited Withdrawal from Afghanistan

Washington, D.C.Congresswoman Barbara Lee (D-CA) and Members of Congress from both political parties will hold a press conference in support of expedited withdrawal of US troops from Afghanistan on Wednesday, May 16, 2012, at 10:00 a.m. EST.  As President Obama prepares to address the NATO summit, Members will address the growing opposition among Americans and announce the opening of a letter to be delivered to the President urging expedited withdrawal.  Seventy nine Members of the House have signed the letter, including 4 Republicans. 

 

WHO:              U.S. Rep. Barbara Lee (D-CA)

                        U.S. Rep. Walter Jones (R-NC)

                        U.S. Rep. Pete Stark (D-CA)

U.S. Rep. Peter Welch (D-VT)

U.S. Rep. Lynn Woolsey (D-CA)

U.S. Rep. James McGovern (D-MA)

U.S. Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-NY)

U.S. Rep. Janice Hahn (D-CA)

U.S. Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-OH)

U.S. Rep. Timothy V. Johnson (R-IL)

                        U.S. Rep. John Conyers (D-MI)

U.S. Rep. Sam Farr (D-CA)

                        U.S. Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-NY)

                        U.S. Rep. Laura Richardson (D-CA)

 

WHAT:             Press Conference

 

WHEN:             Wednesday, May 16, 2012, at 10:00 a.m. EST

 

WHERE:           HVC-117, Studio B, U.S. Capitol, Washington, D.C.

 

###

 

Copy of the letter, signed by 79 Members of the House including 4 Republicans:

The Honorable Barack Obama
President of the United States
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, DC  20500

Dear President Obama:

Earlier this month you visited Afghanistan to sign a Strategic Partnership Agreement.  As you stated at Bagram Air Base, “this time of war began in Afghanistan, and this is where it will end.” The core of al Qaeda has been greatly reduced in size and ability to attack Americans. Our brave men and women in uniform have done everything that we have asked of them. With over 17,000 dead and wounded U.S. servicemen and women, and long term costs estimated at $4 trillion for the past decade of unfunded wars, the overwhelming majority of American people want to bring the war in Afghanistan to an expedited end.

While many of us would prefer an immediate full withdrawal from Afghanistan, there is broad, bipartisan consensus in Congress and across America that it is time to accelerate the transition from U.S. to full Afghan control.  We also remind you that any agreement committing U.S. troops to Afghanistan must have congressional approval to be binding.

Therefore, at the upcoming NATO summit in Chicago, we ask that you announce an accelerated transition of security responsibility to the Afghan government and security forces and the expedited withdrawal of our troops from Afghanistan as quickly as these can be safely and responsibly accomplished.

Sincerely,

Members of Congress

The ‘Subsidized’ Loan Charade: The US Government is Profiteering on Struggling Students

By Dave Lindorff

The Senate is currently deadlocked on taking action to prevent the interest on new Stafford guaranteed student loans from rising on July 1 from 3.4% to 6.8%, with Democrats saying they want to “pay for” keeping the current “lower” 3.4% rate by closing a loophole that allows some wealthy people to avoid paying Social Security and Medicare taxes, while Republicans want to “pay for” keeping the lower rate by eliminating a fund for preventative health care in the 2010 health care reform law.


But what is all this nonsense about “paying for” a supposedly “lower” interest rate of 3.4%?

Sanders, Ellison to File Bill to End Fossil Fuel Subsidies

WASHINGTON, May 8 – Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Rep. Keith Ellison (D-Minn.), will hold a news conference Thursday to announce legislation that would eliminate all oil, coal and gas production subsidies.

The measure would do away with tax breaks, financial assistance, royalty relief, direct federal research and development and many loopholes that benefit the fossil fuel industry. Under current law, more than $110 billion in federal subsidies would go to oil, coal and gas industries in the coming decade.

The bill is supported by 350.org, Taxpayers for Common Sense, Friends of the Earth, Sierra Club and Defenders of Wildlife. Bill McKibben, founder of 350.org, Erich Pica, president of Friends of the Earth, and Ryan Alexander, president of Taxpayers for Common Sense will join Sanders and Ellision.

Who: Sen. Sanders, Rep. Ellison, Bill McKibben of 350.0rg, Erich Pica of Friends of the Earth and Ryan Alexander of Taxpayers for Common Sense

What: News conference to announce legislation to end fossil fuel subsidies

When: 11:45 a.m., Tuesday, May 10, 2012

Where: Senate swamp Map

    

Sign on to Letter to President Obama: Expedite Withdrawal from Afghanistan

From: The Honorable Barbara Lee
Date: 5/2/2012

Dear Colleague,

The American people have overwhelmingly come to the conclusion that our brave men and women in uniform have accomplished all that we have asked of them and it is time to bring them home from Afghanistan.

Members of Congress need to stand with seven out of ten Americans (including 52% of GOP voters) who oppose the war in Afghanistan.

We invite you to sign on to the letter below which closes on May 10, 2012 (ahead of the NATO Summit in Chicago).  The letter calls on the President to expedite our troops’ return and speed up the transition to having Afghans in charge of Afghanistan.

Sincerely,

Barbara Lee                                        Walter Jones

Member of Congress                     Member of Congress

 

Current Co-Signers (49): Adam Smith, Baldwin, Bass, Capps, Chu, Yvette Clarke, Clay, Cohen, Conyers, Costello, John Duncan, Edwards, Ellison, Farr, Filner, Frank, Grijalva, Hahn, Alcee Hastings, Heinrich, Hinchey, Holt, Honda, Jackson Jr., Tim Johnson, Kucinich, Lewis, Lofgren, Maloney, McCollum, McGovern, Michaud, George Miller, Moore, Nadler, Olver, Pingree, Polis, Rangel, Richardson, Loretta Sanchez, Serrano, Slaughter, Stark, Mike Thompson, Tonko, Frederica Wilson, Woolsey, Yarmuth.

May 10, 2012

 

The Honorable Barack Obama

President of the United States

The White House

1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW

Washington, DC  20500

 

Dear President Obama:

 

           Last week you visited Afghanistan to sign a Strategic Partnership Agreement.  As you stated at Bagram Air Base, “this time of war began in Afghanistan, and this is where it will end.” The core of al Qaeda has been greatly reduced in size and ability to attack Americans. Our brave men and women in uniform have done everything that we have asked of them. With over 17,000 dead and wounded U.S. servicemen and women, and long term costs estimated at $4 trillion for the past decade of unfunded wars, the overwhelming majority of American people want to bring the war in Afghanistan to an expedited end.

           While many of us would prefer an immediate full withdrawal from Afghanistan, there is broad, bipartisan consensus in Congress and across America that it is time to accelerate the transition from U.S. to full Afghan control.  We also remind you that any agreement committing U.S. troops to Afghanistan must have congressional approval to be binding.

            Therefore, at the upcoming NATO summit in Chicago, we ask that you announce an accelerated transition of security responsibility to the Afghan government and security forces and the expedited withdrawal of our troops from Afghanistan as quickly as these can be safely and responsibly accomplished.

Sincerely,

Members of Congress

Kucinich: We are Not Exiting Afghanistan. We are Staying.

Strategic Partnership Agreement Commits U.S. to Afghanistan for the Indefinite Future

Washington D.C. (May 2, 2012) – Congressman Dennis Kucinich (D-OH), who has led the call to end the war in Afghanistan, today released the following statement after President Obama announced that the U.S. has signed a Strategic Partnership Agreement with Afghanistan.

“Yesterday, the President announced that the U.S. signed a Strategic Partnership Agreement with Afghanistan, committing the United States to the country for a long time to come. The agreement addressed the transition to Afghan-led security forces by 2014. Human and monetary costs to the U.S. will continue to skyrocket.

“According to a recent article in The Atlantic, the U.S. spends an estimated $14,000 per Afghan troop per year. The long-term costs to the U.S. to train the 352,000 Afghan security troops we are counting on to allow the withdrawal of U.S. troops will be over $4 billion per year; or more than $40 billion over the next ten years. The Associated Press recently highlighted a report that raises significant questions regarding International Security Assistance Force claims that there have been Afghan-led military operations, an indicator of progress toward Afghan military self sufficiency, a cornerstone of our strategy.

“It is widely recognized that much of Al-Qaeda’s leadership and presence in Afghanistan has been decimated. Since the death of Osama bin Laden exactly one year ago, we have lost 381 U.S. troops. The President stated that ‘we must give Afghanistan the opportunity to stabilize.’ The assertion that maintaining a long-term presence in the country is the best way to prevent future attacks on the U.S. belies the reality on the ground: that our mere presence is destabilizing. The events of the past few months alone – the Koran burnings, coordinated attacks by the Taliban in Kabul, and the killing of Afghan civilians by a U.S. solider – should be enough of an indication that more time in Afghanistan is not the answer.

“America has been lulled to sleep by the mindboggling elongation of a war seven thousand miles away. The plain fact is we are not exiting Afghanistan, despite the appearances which the White House is trying to create. We are staying.  Have we learned nothing from ten years of quagmire? It is time to bring our troops home safely and responsibly.”

###

On Proposal to Fund Military With Cuts to Food Stamps, Kucinich Asks “What Kind of Country Do We Want to Live In?”

 
Food For Hungry Americans or Wars Abroad?

Washington D.C. (May 2, April 2012) -- Congressman Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) today asked Americans to consider what kind of a country they want to live in – a country where our friends and neighbors have enough food to eat or a nation that wages unending warfare. The question comes as recent news reports point to a proposal to cut food assistance for hungry families to fund the Department of Defense.


Click on the image to see the video.

“What are our national priorities? This is not an abstract question. What kind of a country do we want to live in?

“We spend about $115 billion a year for the war in Afghanistan alone. By comparison, since the Wall Street financial disaster of 2008, the down economy has resulted in millions of Americans losing their homes to foreclosure. Tens of millions can’t find jobs. Five-point-five million people have not been able to find work in more than 27 weeks.

“Last year alone, nearly 45 million Americans needed help to simply have enough food to eat. For those not qualified through other programs, a family of four would need to survive on less than $29,055 a year in order to be eligible for this assistance. In the United States of America, nearly 1 in 6 Americans needed help just to put food on the table.

“Now, because of two wars fought on our nation’s credit card, the Bush tax cuts and a slow economy, our government is currently operating at a deficit. Economists encourage government to spend more to spur economic growth, but Congress has called for austerity instead. Because of the Budget Control Act passed last summer, we need to cut $1.2 trillion over 10 years beginning in 2013, with half the cuts coming from the Department of Defense.

“Despite the years of massive growth and well-documented inefficiency, many people in Washington think it’s unacceptable to cut the Pentagon’s budget. Instead, they are trying to find other places to make the cuts.

“Where do Washington politicians want to make cuts to protect the war budget? You guessed it: food assistance for hungry Americans.

“This is what it means to consider our national priorities. Do we want to live in a country where our friends and neighbors have enough to eat? Or a country that wages unending wars abroad?”

 

How Dare Russia

"Self-purification through suffering is easier, I tell you: easier -- than that destiny which you are paving for many of them by wholesale acquittals in court.  You are merely planting cynicism in their souls." --Fyodor Dostoyevsky

The United States Congress is outraged.  Russia, it seems, may have wrongly imprisoned, tortured, and murdered a whistleblower.  In the land of the free, our good representatives are outraged, I tell you.  And not just I.  NPR will tell you.  This calls for action.  There's a bill in the Senate and a bill in the House.  The Sergei Magnitsky Rule of Law Accountability Act. 

Who wouldn't support the rule of law and accountability?

Well, let me think.

Oh, I know. The United States Congress. 

Bush and Cheney are selling books confessing to the crime of war and all that comes with it, including lawless imprisonment and torture.  They have openly confessed in their books and on television, repeatedly, to a form of torture that the current Attorney General of the United States admits is torture.  Bush's torture program tortured numerous people to death.  And what has Congress wrought?

No impeachments.

No enforcement of subpoenas.

No defunding of operations.

No criminalizing of secrecy.

No protection of whistleblowers.

No mandating of diplomacy, reparations, foreign aid, or commitments to international standards.

In other words, we have no Congress with the right to talk about the Rule of Law or Accountability without being mocked.

But keep hope alive.

Change is on the way.

Look!

Up in the sky!

It's Captain Peace Prize!

Obama launches wars without bothering to lie to Congress or the United Nations, has formalized the powers of lawless imprisonment, rendition, and murder, and places the protection of Bush and Cheney above almost anything else -- certainly above the rule of law or accountability.

Obama has badgered Spain, Italy, Germany, and the U.K. to leave the Bush gang in peace, publicly instructed the U.S. Department of Justice not to prosecute, and expanded claims of "State Secrets" beyond anything previously imagined in order to shut down legal accountability.  Italy has convicted CIA agents in absentia, and Obama has not shipped them over to do their time.  Poland is prosecuting its bit players in U.S. crimes.  Former top British official Jack Straw is being hauled into court for his tangential role.  But Obama has chosen a path to success in Washington, or thinks he has, and that path is immunity for anyone with power. 

The trouble is that Obama now wants to apply that same standard to Russia, and Congress won't stand for it.  Obama is opposed to the Hold Russia Accountable Act because he prefers to kiss up to the government of Russia.  It's a policy that has worked beautifully for him at home.  Why not apply it abroad?

Of course, the United States has no moral standing to speak against imprisonment, torture, or murder.  The United States imprisons more of its people than any other country, keeps hundreds of thousands of them in supermaxes or long-term isolation, tolerates prison rape and violence, openly treats torture as a policy option, facilitates torture in what may be the two countries torturing the greatest number of people today: Iraq and Afghanistan, and kills with capital punishment, special forces, and drones. 

The United States has no moral standing to speak against the punishment of whistleblowers, Obama having prosecuted seven of them under the Espionage Act of 1917, fittingly enough for the offense of having made U.S. war-making look bad by revealing facts about it. 

But the answer cannot be to support Russian crimes just because there are U.S. crimes.  Congress, revolting as it is to say, is right: the Russian government should be held to a decent rule of law.  And it should be held to it through the language that speaks louder than words: action.  U.S. immunity for torturers is one of the greatest factors in the current spread of acceptability for torture around the world.

Congress should impeach Bush and Obama, enforce its subpoenas, ship convicted CIA criminals to Italy, strengthen the War Powers Act, criminalize war profiteering, ban private mercenaries, ban unconstitutional detentions, ban secret budgets and laws and agencies, ban rendition, and ratify and enforce the Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture and other Cruel Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment.  Congress should also cease encircling Russia with missiles, and end its wars in Afghanistan, Pakistan, etc.

Or, short of moving in a useful direction, sad to say, the best thing the United States Congress could do for the rule of law in Russia at the moment would be to shut the hell up.

Even Congress Members Ready to End U.S. Killing in Afghanistan -- Who's Left?

Lynch reverses field on Afghan mission

By Bryan Bender, Boston Globe
  • Representative Stephen Lynch, who has traveled to the Iraqi and Afghan war zones more than almost any other member of Congress,             visited the village of Spin Boldak in Afghanistan in 2010.
Representative Stephen Lynch, who has traveled to the Iraqi and Afghan… (US House of Representatives)

WASHINGTON - During one of Representative Stephen F. Lynch’s early visits to Afghanistan, a crush of angry protesters had to be forced out of the path of his convoy with rifle butts. When his plane approached Iraq in the weeks after the 2003 invasion, enemy mortars were still striking the runway.

The South Boston Democrat, who won his seat in a special election on Sept. 11, 2001, has traveled to the war zones in Iraq and Afghanistan 21 times, more often than almost any other member of Congress.

He has often been the only Democrat in the visiting delegation. The fact-finding missions - often into savaged neighborhoods, his blood type written on his body armor in case of attack - helped make him much more supportive of the decadelong war effort in Afghanistan than his Bay State colleagues.

Not anymore. Lynch, frustrated by a lack of progress, is now breaking with the Obama administrationand calling on the president to speed up American withdrawal from Afghanistan by at least a year.

“I don’t think we are going to get there in 2014,’’ said Lynch, speaking about the administration’s timeline for withdrawal. “The pace of progress is so slow that the law of diminishing returns will apply. I don’t think there will be any added measure of benefit that is worth the sacrifice to stay an extra year.’’

READ THE REST.

obama     obama     obama     obama     obama     obama     obama     obama     obama

Greed Kills

Veterans for Peace National President, Leah Bolger, Protests at the Congressional Super Committee.

This powerful video shows Leah Bolger very calmly and courageously addressing the Congressional Super Committee as she eloquently spoke out against military spending and for spending for social needs and a more just society.

Leah walked right past the table of witnesses and directly addressed the Senators. Her shirt read "GREED KILLS." 

She was arrested and now she will be pleading guilty to speaking out to tell the truth. Her trial will begin on April 12, 2012 in Washington, DC. 

Embody the message. Wear GREED KILLS in solidarity with Leah.

Order a shirt here: http://shop.wewillnotbesilent.net/collections/greed-kills/products/greed-kills

Watch the video here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aZVtPhVBM5Q

Tweet GREED KILLS and tag this campaign:

@leahbolger

@VFPNational

Hi-Ho! The US is a Police State

 

By Dave Lindorff

 

Back in the early 1980s, I had the extraordinary good fortune to get to meet one of my literary heroes, Kurt Vonnegut, up close and personal.  We shared a police wagon, sitting next to each other for a ride to the station to be booked for blocking the door to the South African consulate in a demonstration against that country’s then policy of white rule and apartheid.

 

I can’t say I got to know the author very well, but he was quite friendly and interesting to talk to, and after our arrest and booking was over, and we were released, I shared a cab as far as his house.

 

Anti-War Group Urges Legislators to Back Anti-Nuke Bill

From Alternet:

In the wake of the economic crisis, municipalities across the US have reduced vital services due to federal spending cutbacks. But one House representative knows an area where it makes sense for the federal government to cut back: nuclear weapons spending. And now, a Peace Action New York State petition is urging more representatives to support Edward Markey’s (D-MA) bill to reduce the US nuclear weapons budget.

Last month, Markey introduced the Smarter Approach to Nuclear Expenditures Act (H.R. 3974). It’s in line with President Barack Obama’s vision of a world free of nuclear weapons--a vision that has run into right-wing opposition.

The SANE act, the name of which is a nod to past anti-nuclear activism, would, as Lawrence Wittner explains, "cut $100 billion from the U.S. nuclear weapons budget over the next ten years by reducing the current fleet of U.S. nuclear submarines, delaying the purchase of new nuclear submarines, reducing the number of ICBMs, delaying a new bomber program, and ending the nuclear mission of air bombers."

Markey’s bill has garnered 45 co-sponsors. Peace Action New York State, which notes that seven members of the New York Congressional delegation have signed on, is calling for more co-sponsors. A lobby day around the SANE act organized by the peace group is set to take place in New York this Spring.

“Given the current economic crisis, it is wasteful to spend billions of dollars to maintain and improve nuclear weapons and their delivery systems,” the petition reads in part. “We ask that you co-sponsor H.R. 3974 to show your support for returning federal spending priorities to support human needs and not excessive militarism.”

You can sign the petition here, and read the text of Markey’s bill here.

Senator Rand Paul Blocks Bill That Would Have Moved U.S. Closer to War on Iran

From Reuters:

A U.S. Republican lawmaker on Tuesday blocked Democrats from passing legislation designed to further punish Iran for developing its nuclear program, and each side blamed the other for its failure in a presidential election year that will put extra scrutiny on President Barack Obama to be tough on Tehran.

The legislation, which had the backing of many Democratic and Republican Senators, focused on foreign banks that handle transactions for Iran's national oil and tanker companies, and included a host of measures aimed to close loopholes in existing sanctions.

A handful of Republicans wanted to include additional measures to the bill such as sanctions on companies that insure trade with Iran. But Majority Leader Harry Reid wanted to take up the legislation without amendments.

"New changes to the bill at this time will only slow down its passage," Reid, a Democrat, said before he sought unanimous consent from Senators to approve the legislation - a procedure that allows no amendments.

Senator Rand Paul formally objected to taking up the legislation unless the Senate would also consider his amendment to it saying that nothing in the bill could be construed as an authorization of war against Iran or Syria. This effectively blocked the bill from advancing.

The timing of the next step was not immediately clear.

The latest set of penalties signed into law by President Barack Obama in December have made it increasingly difficult for Tehran to sell its oil. They are aimed at slowing Iran's nuclear program, which Tehran has said is purely for civilian purposes. The United States and some other Western countries say the program is for nuclear weapons.

The bill would have built on efforts by the United States and other Western nations to implement oil and banking sanctions.

"These sanctions are a key tool as we work to stop (Iran) from obtaining a nuclear weapon, threatening Israel and ultimately jeopardizing U.S. national security," Reid said earlier on Tuesday.

The Senate Banking Committee easily passed the sanctions bill on February 2 and the full House of Representatives passed its version in December.

ADDITIONAL PROPOSALS

Since then, several lawmakers have floated additional proposals to penalize underwriters that insure oil and gas trade with Iran; to block foreign companies dealing with Iranian energy companies from U.S. financial markets; and to ban foreign companies that buy Iranian oil from buying oil from U.S. emergency reserves.

Before Paul blocked the bill, Reid said Democratic senators had agreed to move forward without offering any amendments, which could speed a vote. "I'm willing to move this bill without amendments at any time," Reid said afterward.

Democrats were quick to blame Republicans for blocking the bill. "I hope that the select few Republicans who reportedly blocked this important bill will reconsider their opposition and allow it to move forward as soon as possible," said Tim Johnson, the Democratic chairman of the Senate Banking Committee.

Norman Solomon Commits to Bringing Peace and Justice Movement into Congress

Over the weekend, The Washington Post published a long, inside report that should scare the wits out of every progressive in this country. And it has further energized our campaign for Congress.

The Post revealed that President Obama -- in hopes of making a "grand bargain" on the budget with Republicans last summer -- had offered billions of dollars of cuts in Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid.

And there’s something even scarier in the new Post account: "White House officials said this week that the offer is still on the table."

Still on the table!

It's bad enough when Congressman Paul Ryan and the Republicans try to gut Social Security and Medicare -- they don't need any help from so-called "moderate Democrats."

I want to go to Congress to stop the right-wing agenda. Even if that sometimes means pushing back against the Democratic Party establishment.

Please support my campaign so I can stand up to immoral budget deals -- just as Sen. Bernie Sanders did when he inspired millions with his filibustering speech against President Obama’s deal with the GOP to extend Bush’s tax cuts for the wealthy.

Believe me: I was thoroughly honored when a member of Congress (Democrat Mike Honda), after hearing me speak, called me "a young Bernie Sanders."

Please donate if you want me to go to Congress to promote a totally different plan for deficit reduction:

#1 -- Defund the wars, bring our troops home and make major cuts in military spending, which accounts for the majority of federal discretionary spending. Most Americans support big military cuts.

#2 -- Raise taxes on the top 1% and end tax loopholes and subsidies for large corporations. Most Americans want the wealthy to pay their share.

#3 -- Impose controls on Wall Street to curb the gambling that tanked the global economy, including a Financial Transaction Tax that raises revenue while reducing speculation.

If you want to help me fight for this program in Washington, please click here.

In Congress, I will be loud and proud in putting these popular proposals on the table – while standing rock-solid against cuts to our sacred safety-net and healthcare programs.

If we stand and fight for progressive values in Washington, the American public will be with us.

Please help me get to Congress.

Yours truly,

Norman Solomon

Obama, Pelosi, and Reid Have an Offer on the Table That Cuts Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid

From the Washington Post:

That night, Obama prepared his party’s congressional leaders. He warned Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) that he might return to the position under discussion the previous Sunday — that is, cuts to Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid in exchange for just $800 billion in tax increases.

Would they support him?

The Democratic leaders “kind of gulped” when they heard the details, Daley recalled.

By this time, Obama had become the face of the bitter debt-ceiling talks and his poll numbers were dropping. His allies on Capitol Hill cringed at his predicament but also at what he was asking them to do.

Dan Pfeiffer, the White House communications director, recalled that the president and his team felt the weight of the global economy “on our shoulders.”

“Is there political benefit to coming to a big budget deal with John Boehner? Sure,” Pfeiffer said. “But every other political and message imperative was thrown out the door to prevent a disaster and do the right thing for the country. That’s why we were willing to do things we wouldn’t normally do.”

Reluctantly, Reid and Pelosi agreed to do their best to support the plan.

Boehner, meanwhile, had gone dark. . . .

. . . White House officials said this week that the offer is still on the table.

Afghanistan: The Wheels Are Coming Off

 

By John Grant

 

When does a determination to look on the bright side turn into a state of denial? That is, when do leaders of a secrecy-obsessed US government admit the decision-making surrounding the wars in both Iraq and Afghanistan was misguided from the beginning and the endgame is a mess because of it?

While the leadership of America is mud-wrestling with itself in the election "silly season," the nation is watching the wheels come off its military occupation of Afghanistan. It feels like that special effects TV ad for a new SUV in which, as the SUV speeds forward, thousands of its parts magically come flinging loose until we see nothing but the truck chassis speeding ahead.

No Amount of Troops, Training or Money will Result in a Stable Afghanistan

Washington, D.C. (March 12, 2012) – Congressman Dennis J. Kucinich today released the following statement after an American soldier killed at least 16 Afghan civilians, including children:

“Yesterday’s shooting in Afghanistan which left at least 16 civilians dead is a tipping point.  This shooting follows days of deadly rioting after it was revealed that U.S. troops had incinerated copies of the Koran.  Despite more than a decade at war and nearly $600 billion of U.S. tax-payer dollars, it is obvious that the U.S. presence in Afghanistan has created instability in that country, not stability.”     

“According to a recent Washington Post poll, more than half of the American public wants the U.S. to withdraw from Afghanistan before it can complete its stated mission of training Afghan troops.  Increasing anti-American sentiment in Afghanistan has placed U.S. troops at great risk.  There is no amount of troops, training or money that will result in a stable Afghanistan.  It is time to bring the troops home now.”

Norman Solomon Would Bring a Voice for Peace to Congress

Dear David,

You may remember Bob Dylan singing:
 
If God's on our side
He’ll stop the next war.
 
I often think of people I met in Baghdad. And in Kabul. And in Tehran.

I've seen children of war -- from threadbare hospitals to rubble-strewn streets to refugee camps.

As the only candidate in this race with foreign-policy experience, I’m not satisfied to hear “Bring our troops home.” We end up saying that because they were sent to war in the first place.

I went to Baghdad three times before the invasion of Iraq -- taking a Congressman and former Senator, an acclaimed actor and a former high-ranking U.N. official -- to meet with top Iraqi officials while the Bush administration, hell-bent on war, refused to engage in the slightest bit of diplomacy.

Later, as a guest on C-SPAN’s “Washington Journal” and other media outlets, I opposed the escalation that tripled the U.S. troop levels in Afghanistan during 2009 and 2010.

Now, I’m speaking out against a military attack on Iran.

It’s not enough to slow down the war drums. We need to render them silent.

That’s one of the main reasons I’m running for Congress.

By clicking here, you can help boost our campaign.

With Congresswoman Lynn Woolsey set to retire at the end of this year, it's crucial that her replacement be just as committed to ending endless war and finding alternatives to what Martin Luther King Jr. called “the madness of militarism.”

War is the illness of the state -- debilitating our society, making us incapable of getting our priorities straight.

In less than 60 days, voting will begin for the open seat here in California’s new 2nd District along the North Coast. Our campaign is, by far, the grassroots leader -- with more than 850 volunteers and more than 3,800 different contributors. We don’t accept corporate PAC money. We’re relying on the powerful dedication, hard work and passion of practical idealists who are determined to help create a better world.

At a time when all too many of our best lawmakers for peace and justice won’t be returning to Congress next year, we can’t afford to lose this seat to a “moderate” practitioner of political business as usual.

You can provide tangible help to our campaign.

Soon the airwaves and mailboxes will be filled with political messages bought by opponents who are relying on funds from wealthy donors.

Now, I need to ask you to make a contribution -- perhaps another generous contribution -- so we can get our message out. To do that, we need thousands of lawn signs. Hundreds of thousands of brochures. And a lot more.

For crucial outreach and “media messaging,” I need your help now.

* If you’d like to make possible four lawn signs (and the stakes to go in the ground with them), click here to contribute $20.

* If you can spring for a dozen lawn signs, click here to contribute $60.

* Or here to provide for twenty lawn signs by contributing $100.

* How about full-color brochures for our volunteers to take door-to-door? You can provide 1,000 brochures with a contribution of $80.

You get the idea. This is a grassroots campaign. And you can really make a difference.

California’s new election law says that the top two finishers in June -- regardless of party -- will advance to a November run-off. Polling shows we can get there, but only with your help!
 
This race is up for grabs.
Let’s grab it for peace.
 
Please tell friends, relatives and colleagues about our campaign. And you can help a lot by volunteering or contributing.

Thank you!

Best wishes,
Norman

P.S. -- Our friend Phil Donahue is speaking alongside me at a campaign fundraiser in Washington later this month. If you know people around D.C. who might want to attend, please pass this invitation along to them.
 


Endorse NormanVolunteer here
Contribute here
 
 

 
Paid for by Norman Solomon
and authorized by Norman Solomon for Congress Committee
707-763-8683  *  415-482-8683

Prevent Iran from Acquiring Nuclear Weapons and Stop War Through Diplomacy Act (Introduced in House - IH)

112th CONGRESS

2d Session

H. R. 4173

To direct the President of the United States to appoint a high-level United States representative or special envoy for Iran for the purpose of ensuring that the United States pursues all diplomatic avenues to prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon, to avoid a war with Iran, and for other purposes.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

March 8, 2012

Ms. LEE of California (for herself, Mr. JONES, Mr. CONYERS, Ms. WOOLSEY, Mr. KUCINICH, Ms. WATERS, Mr. STARK, Mr. ELLISON, Mr. FILNER, and Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs


A BILL

To direct the President of the United States to appoint a high-level United States representative or special envoy for Iran for the purpose of ensuring that the United States pursues all diplomatic avenues to prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon, to avoid a war with Iran, and for other purposes.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the `Prevent Iran from Acquiring Nuclear Weapons and Stop War Through Diplomacy Act'.

SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

Congress finds the following:

(1) In his Nobel Peace Prize acceptance speech on December 10, 2009, President Obama said, `I know that engagement with repressive regimes lacks the satisfying purity of indignation. But I also know that sanctions without outreach--and condemnation without discussion--can carry forward a crippling status quo. No repressive regime can move down a new path unless it has the choice of an open door.'

(2) In his address to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee on March 4, 2012, President Obama said, `I have said that when it comes to preventing Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon, I will take no options off the table, and I mean what I say. That includes all elements of American power. A political effort aimed at isolating Iran; a diplomatic effort to sustain our coalition and ensure that the Iranian program is monitored; an economic effort to impose crippling sanctions; and, yes, a military effort to be prepared for any contingency.'

(3) While the Obama Administration has rejected failed policies of the past by engaging in negotiations with Iran without preconditions, only four of such meetings have occurred.

(4) Official representatives of the United States and official representatives of Iran have held only two direct, bilateral meetings in over 30 years, both of which occurred in October 2009, one on the sidelines of the United Nations Security Council negotiations in Geneva, and one on the sidelines of negotiations brokered by the United Nations International Atomic Energy Agency (referred to in this Act as the `IAEA') in Vienna.

(5) All of the outstanding issues between the United States and Iran cannot be resolved instantaneously. Resolving such issues will require a robust, sustained effort.

(6) Under the Department of State's current `no contact' policy, officers and employees of the Department of State are not permitted to make any direct contact with official representatives of the Government of Iran without express prior authorization from the Secretary of State.

(7) On September 20, 2011, then-Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral Mike Mullen, called for establishing direct communications with Iran, stating, `I'm talking about any channel that's open. We've not had a direct link of communication with Iran since 1979. And I think that has planted many seeds for miscalculation. When you miscalculate, you can escalate and misunderstand.'

(8) On November 8, 2011, the IAEA issued a report about Iran's nuclear program and expressed concerns about Iran's past and ongoing nuclear activities.

(9) On December 2, 2011, Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta warned that an attack on Iran would result in `an escalation that would take place that would not only involve many lives, but I think it could consume the Middle East in a confrontation and a conflict that we would regret.'

SEC. 3. STATEMENT OF POLICY.

It should be the policy of the United States--

(1) to prevent Iran from pursuing or acquiring a nuclear weapon and to resolve the concerns of the United States and of the international community about Iran's nuclear program and Iran's human rights obligations under international and Iranian law;

(2) to ensure inspection of cargo to or from Iran, as well as the seizure and disposal of prohibited items, as authorized by United Nations Security Council Resolution 1929 (June 9, 2010);

(3) to pursue sustained, direct, bilateral negotiations with the Government of Iran without preconditions in order to reduce tensions, prevent war, prevent nuclear proliferation, support human rights, and seek resolutions to issues that concern the United States and the international community;

(4) to utilize all diplomatic tools, including direct talks, targeted sanctions, Track II diplomacy, creating a special envoy described in section 4, and enlisting the support of all interested parties, for the purpose of establishing an agreement with Iran to put in place a program that includes international safeguards, guarantees, and robust transparency measures that provide for full IAEA oversight of Iran's nuclear program, including rigorous, ongoing inspections, in order to verify that Iran's nuclear program is exclusively for peaceful purposes and that Iran is not engaged in nuclear weapons work;

(5) to pursue opportunities to build mutual trust and to foster sustained negotiations in good faith with Iran, including pursuing a fuel swap deal to remove quantities of low enriched uranium from Iran and to refuel the Tehran Research Reactor, similar to the structure of the deal that the IAEA, the United States, China, Russia, France, the United Kingdom, and Germany first proposed in October 2009;

(6) to explore areas of mutual benefit to both Iran and the United States, such as regional security, the long-term stabilization of Iraq and Afghanistan, the establishment of a framework for peaceful nuclear energy production, other peaceful energy modernization programs, and counter-narcotics efforts; and

(7) that no funds appropriated or otherwise made available to any executive agency of the Government of the United States may be used to carry out any military operation or activity against Iran unless the President determines that a military operation or activity is warranted and seeks express prior authorization by Congress, as required under article I, section 8, clause 2 of the United States Constitution, which grants Congress the sole authority to declare war, except that this requirement shall not apply to a military operation or activity--

(A) to directly repel an offensive military action launched from within the territory of Iran against the United States or any ally with whom the United States has a mutual defense assistance agreement;

(B) in hot pursuit of forces that engage in an offensive military action outside the territory of Iran against United States forces or an ally with whom the United States has a mutual defense assistance agreement and then enter into the territory of Iran; or

(C) to directly thwart an imminent offensive military action to be launched from within the territory of Iran against United States forces or an ally with whom the United States has a mutual defense assistance agreement.

SEC. 4. APPOINTMENT OF HIGH-LEVEL U.S. REPRESENTATIVE OR SPECIAL ENVOY.

(a) Appointment- At the earliest possible date, the President, in consultation with the Secretary of State, shall appoint a high-level United States representative or special envoy for Iran.

(b) Criteria for Appointment- The President shall appoint an individual under subsection (a) on the basis of the individual's knowledge and understanding of the issues regarding Iran's nuclear program, experience in conducting international negotiations, and ability to conduct negotiations under subsection (c) with the respect and trust of the parties involved in the negotiations.

(c) Duties- The high-level United States representative or special envoy for Iran shall--

(1) seek to facilitate direct, unconditional, bilateral negotiations with Iran for the purpose of easing tensions and normalizing relations between the United States and Iran;

(2) lead the diplomatic efforts of the Government of the United States with regard to Iran;

(3) consult with other countries and international organizations, including countries in the region, where appropriate and when necessary to achieve the purpose set forth in paragraph (1);

(4) act as liaison with United States and international intelligence agencies where appropriate and when necessary to achieve the purpose set for in paragraph (1); and

(5) ensure that the bilateral negotiations under paragraph (1) complement the ongoing international negotiations with Iran.

SEC. 5. DUTIES OF THE SECRETARY OF STATE.

(a) Elimination of `No Contact' Policy- Not later than 30 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary of State shall rescind the `no contact' policy that prevents officers and employees of the Department of State from making any direct contact with official representatives of the Government of Iran without express prior authorization from the Secretary of State.

(b) Office of High-Level U.S. Representative or Special Envoy- Not later than 30 days after the appointment of a high-level United States representative or special envoy under section 4(a), the Secretary of State shall establish an office in the Department of State for the purpose of supporting the work of the representative or special envoy.

SEC. 6. REPORTING TO CONGRESS.

(a) Reports- Not later than 60 days after the high-level United States representative or special envoy for Iran is appointed under section 4, and every 180 days thereafter, the United States representative or special envoy shall report to the committees set forth in subsection (b) on the steps that have been taken to facilitate direct, bilateral diplomacy with the government of Iran under section 4(c). Each such report may, when necessary or appropriate, be submitted in classified and unclassified form.

(b) Committees- The committees referred to in subsection (a) are--

(1) the Committee on Appropriations, the Committee on Foreign Affairs, the Committee on Armed Services, and the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence of the House of Representatives; and

(2) the Committee on Appropriations, the Committee on Foreign Relations, the Committee on Armed Services, and the Select Committee on Intelligence of the Senate.

SEC. 7. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

There are authorized to be appropriated to carry out this Act such sums as may be necessary for each of fiscal years 2012 and 2013.

The Peace Movement Needs Kucinich, With or Without Congress

If Congressman Dennis Kucinich becomes simply Dennis Kucinich sans the "Congressman" his value to the peace movement need not diminish. 

I admit it's been nice having someone in Congress who would say and do what he would.  There have been and remain other relatively strong voices for peace, but none as strong as Kucinich's.  His resolutions have forced the debates.  His bills have changed the conversation.  His questioning of witnesses has afflicted the comfortable while seeking to comfort the afflicted.  Perhaps Congressman Norman Solomon will pick up the baton.  Time will tell.

CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Image CAPTCHA
Enter the characters shown in the image.

Sign Up Fast Here